The effectiveness of the Montana Office of Public Instruction K-12 School Administration Internship
and the Regular University K-12 School Administration Internship
by Ramona Ann Stout
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by Ramona Ann Stout (2001)
Abstract:
The problem of this study was to determine if there was a significant difference in the perceived
preparation of administrative interns and in the mentoring activities of mentor (supervising)
administrators in (1) the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) Internship program and (2) the internship
included as part of the regular university administrator preparation program. Perceptions of interns and
mentor administrators in both programs were surveyed.
The administrative skills examined were Leadership; Policy; Community Relations; Organizational
Management; Curriculum Planning and Development; Instructional Management; Staff Evaluation and
Personnel Management; Staff Development; Educational Research, Evaluation and Planning; and
Values and Ethics of Leadership. The mentor activities were Relationship Emphasis, Information
Emphasis and Facilitative Focus.
A two-way ANOVA was used to test the statistical hypotheses. The level of significance was set at
alpha = .05.
All participants of the OPI intern program from 1995-1999 and their mentor administrators were
included in this study. For the regular university intern group a random selection was made of those
who attained their administrative degree in the years 1995-1999 and their mentor administrators.
Forty-two interns and 41 mentor administrators participated in the study.
Besides testing for significant differences between the two intern programs on administrative skills and
mentoring, school size, AAJA and B/C, and level of internship, Grades K-8, Elementary, Grades 9-12,
High School, and Grades K-12 were also tested.
Of the tests for significant differences on the 10 administrative skills in the two intern programs, there
was one interaction of type of internship and size of school district on the administrative skill
Educational Research, Evaluation and Planning. Of the tests for significant findings on the mentoring
skills, there were two interactions of type of internship and level of internship in the perception of the
mentors on Relationship Emphasis and Information Emphasis.
Other results of this study showed that the interns in both the OPI and regular university programs
perceive themselves competent or very competent at the end of their internship experience. It was also
noted that the mentor administrators perceived themselves much higher in their mentor activities than
the interns perceived their mentors’ activities. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MONTANA OFFICE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
K-12 SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION INTERNSHIP
AND THE REGULAR UNIVERSITY K-12 SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATION INTERNSHIP
by
Ramona Ann Stout
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillm ent.
o f the requirements for the degree
of
Doctor o f Education
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
January 2001
SO u 1
APPROVAL
of a dissertation submitted by
Ramona Ann Stout
This dissertation has been read by each member of the dissertation committee and
has been found to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations,
bibliographic style, and consistency, and is ready for submission to the College of
Gradua
Z)
)ate
Dr. Eric Strohmeyer
Committee Co-Chair
/Date/
<yt^<Le
Dr. Bruce McLeod
Graduate Dean
Date
STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a
doctoral degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it
available to borrowers under rules of the Library. I further agree that copying of this
dissertation is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use” as
prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for extensive copying or reproduction of
this dissertation should be referred to Bell & Howell Information and Learning, 300
North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, to whom I have granted “the exclusive
right to reproduce and distribute my dissertation in and from microform along with the
non-exclusive right to reproduce and distribute my abstract in any format in whole or in
part.”
Signature_
Date
_______
^
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I dedicate this thesis to my mother, who didn’t have the opportunity to finish
grade school, and my father, both of whom taught me early that one was not allowed to
quit. I thank my husband, Greg, for all his encouragement through many doubts and
occasional tantrums. I thank the members of Doctoral Cohort I for all their support for it
is the friends along the way that helped me realize how fortunate I am. I thank and
appreciate the wisdom of my co-chairs. Dr. Gloria Gregg and Dr. Eric Strohmeyer,
without either of whom I would not have completed this research now or maybe ever. I
thank God for my gifts that have enabled me to Ieam and to achieve. It seems like a long
time has passed since I began this project, but in looking back now the most important
part of it all was the journey, not the end. For it was through all the classes, books, and
rewrites that I learned about learning and I learned about myself.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List o f Tables..................;.......................................................................................................... vii
List o f Figures............................................................................................................................ viii
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................. ix
< 1 O '! U >
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... I
Statement o f the Problem...................
Research Questions to Be Answered
Significance o f the Study...................
Definition o f Terms................................................................................................................ 10
M ethodology........................................................
11
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE.............................................................................................. 13
Introduction............................................................................................................................. 13
Leadership...............................................................................................................................14
Organization Theory...............................................................................................................15
Change in Schools..!................................................................................................................ 17
Schools o f the Future............................................................................................................. 21
Adult Learning.....................................................................................................
24
Mentoring................................................................................................................................ 26
Administrator Preparation.....................................................................................................29
3 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................35
Introduction............................................................................................................................. 35
Conceptual Framework......................................................................................................... 35
Population Description and Sampling Procedure............................................................. 37
Instrumentation.............................................................................
38
Validity and Reliability.........................................................................................................40
Data Collection....................................................................................................................... 43
Hypotheses..............................................................................................................................45
Null Hypotheses..........................................................................................................
46
Analytical Techniques............................................
49
Analysis o f Data: Level o f Significance......................................................
50
Limitations and Delimitations.............................................................................................. 51
TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued
4. FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS..........................................................
Introduction............................................................................................................
Respondent Demographics...................................................................................
Returns ...................................................................................................................
Hypotheses..................................................... ....................................................... .
Interns....;..................................................................................................... .........
Administrative Skills..............................................;.........................................
Mentoring Activities.........................................................................................
Administrators......................................................................................................
Administrative Skills......................... ...............................................................
Mentoring Activities.........................................................................................
Descriptive Statistics..............................................................................................
Comparison o f Mentor and Intern Perceptions o f Mentoring Effectiveness
Mentor Figures.....................................................................................................
Regular University Intern Program................................................................
Mentor Figures.....................................................................................................
OPI Intern Program...........................................................................................
Summary.................................................................................................................
.52
.52
.53
.54
.55
.55
.55
.56
.58
.58
.59
.71
.73
.74
.74
.77
.77
.80
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................
Introduction ...........................................................................................................
Summary o f Findings............................................................................................
Conclusions.............................................................................................................
Recommendations..................................................................................................
Actions...................................... ............................................................................
Research...............................................................................................................
.83
,83
85
87
,89
89
90
REFERENCES CITED........................................................................... :..................
93
vii
APPENDICES............................................................................................................................ ..
Appendix A: AASA Skills for Successful 21 st Century School Leaders.................... 99
Appendix B: Reliability Letter & Administrative and Leadership
Skills Survey...............................................i............................................ 100
Appendix C: Mentor Survey Permission Letter & Survey Letters
and Principles o f Adult Mentoring Scale..............................................101
Appendix D: School Administration and Leadership Skills Survey.......................... 102
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. Administrative Skills Instrument Reliability............................................................ 42
2. Intern Perceptions o f Own Administrative Skills
Type by Size A nalysis................................................................................................ 61
3. Intern Perceptions o f Mentoring Activities
Type by Size A nalysis............................................................................................... 62
4. Intern Perceptions o f Own Administrative Skills
Type by Level Analysis............................................................................................. 63
5. Intern Perceptions o f Mentoring Activities
Type by Level Analysis............................................................................................. 64
6. Mentor Perceptions o f Intern Administrative Skills
Type by Size analysis.......................................
66
7. Mentor Perceptions o f Own Mentoring Activities
Type by Size A nalysis............................................................................................... 68
8. Mentor Perception o f Intern Administrative Skills
Type by Level A nalysis............................................................................................. 69
9. Administrator Perceptions o f Own Mentoring Activities
Type by Level Analysis............................................................................................. 70
10. Mean Scores o f OPI and Regular University Interns
on the 10 Administrative Skill Areas...................................................................... 72
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1. Model o f Systemic Change.......................................................................................28
2. Interaction o f Mentor Activity: Relationship Emphasis Type by L evel............. 65
3. Interaction o f Mentor Activity: Information Emphasis Type by L evel...............65
4. Interaction o f Intern Skills: Type by Size o f School.......................................... „67
5. Regular University Interns and Mentor Administrators
Overall Score - Mentor Behaviors.......................................................................... 74
6 . Regular University Interns and Mentor Administrators
Relationship Emphasis.............................................................................................. 75
7. Regular University Interns and Mentor Administrators
Information Emphasis.........................................................
75
8. Regular University Interns and Mentor Administrators
Facilitative Focus............................................ .... ....................................................76
9. OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Overall Score - Mentor Behaviors......................................................................... 77
10. OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Relationship Emphasis...........................................................
„78
11. OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Information Emphasis............. ......................................................
78
12. OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Facilitative Focus........................
79
13. OPI and Regular Interns and Mentors
Mentor Overall Rating............................................................................................. 80
ABSTRACT
The problem o f this study was to determine if there was a significant difference in
the perceived preparation o f administrative interns and in the mentoring activities o f
mentor (supervising) administrators in (I) the Office o f Public Instruction (OPI)
Internship program and (2) the internship included as part o f the regular university
administrator preparation program. Perceptions o f interns and mentor administrators in
both programs were surveyed.
The administrative skills examined were Leadership; Policy; Community
Relations; Organizational Management; Curriculum Planning and Development;
Instructional Management; StaffEvaluation and Personnel Management; Staff
Development; Educational Research, Evaluation and Planning; and Values and Ethics o f
Leadership. The mentor activities were Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis
and Facilitative Focus.
A two-way ANOVA was used to test the statistical hypotheses. The level o f
significance was set at alpha = .05.
All participants o f the OPI intern program from 1995-1999 and their mentor
administrators were included in this study. For the regular university intern group a
random selection was made o f those who attained their administrative degree in the years
1995-1999 and their mentor administrators. Forty-two interns and 41 mentor
administrators participated in the study.
Besides testing for significant differences between the two intern programs on
administrative skills and mentoring, school size, AAJA and B/C, and level o f internship,
Grades K-8, Elementary, Grades 9-12, High School, and Grades K-12 were also tested.
Of the tests for significant differences on the 10 administrative skills in the two intern
programs, there was one interaction o f type o f internship and size o f school district on the
administrative skill Educational Research, Evaluation and Planning. Ofthe tests for
significant findings on the mentoring skills, there were two interactions o f type of
internship and level o f internship in the perception o f the mentors on Relationship
Emphasis and Information Emphasis.
Other results o f this study showed that the interns in both the OPI and regular
university programs perceive themselves competent or very competent at the end o f their
internship experience. It was also noted that the mentor administrators perceived
themselves much higher in their mentor activities than the interns perceived their
mentors’ activities.
I
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The school year begins with the burst of noisy children rushing through the front
doors of public elementary and high schools throughout the state. Their excited chatter
fills the air as they eagerly find their teachers, classmates and classrooms. Some districts
are finally ready to commence the new school year after a long and sometimes frustrating
search to fill the vacant principal position with a quality leader. Where are the public
school leaders? Why does a school of 600 children interview only three candidates for
superintendent? Was that all the applications they received? Another school of 500
reopens their high school principal position for the third time in order to find that quality
leader. Even one of the largest school districts in Montana begins the new year with an
interim superintendent until the newly hired one can move from out-of-state.
What is causing this situation? Why does there exist an increasing lack of
qualified administrator candidates? What kinds of programs could assist talented
individuals to prepare for and seek a school leadership position?
In a 1999 study sponsored by the Montana School Boards Association (MSBA),
the results indicated that many school administrators are planning to retire in the next five
years, 50% of the 105 responding superintendents and 26% of 126 school principals. Of
the 61.3 % or seventy-three (73) school board chairs and 63.8% or 67 of the district
superintendents who had hired administrators in the last three years, only 20 school board
2
chairs and 10 superintendents indicated that there were no problems in filling the open
positions. The problem most identified in hiring administrators was that the pool of
candidates was too small. Board chairs also indicated that another often-encountered
problem was that the applicants were not well qualified (MSBA, 1999).
This MSBA study also indicated that 88% of school board chairs responding said
that their district had no plan in place for recruiting administrators. The majority of board
chairs (68%), superintendents (76%), and principals (91%) indicated that they encourage
their own employees to fill open positions. There is also very positive support among
board chairs (64%) and superintendents (75%) to expand the OPI internship program to
help address the shortage of qualified administrators. However, at this time most of the
above individuals said that their school district did not currently have a formal
administrator mentor program and thought that such a program would have been helpful
in their own administrative skill development (MSBA, 1999).
Montana is not the only state facing administrative shortages. There is a national
trend of increasing scarcity of superintendent candidates. The American Association of
School Administrators’ (AASA) Executive Director, Paul Houston (1999), estimates that
acting or interim administrators are filling 15% to 20% of superintendent jobs at any
particular time (AASA, 1999). A study commissioned by both the National Association
of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) and the National Association of Secondary
School Principals (NASSP) in 1998 found that shortages do exist nationwide. Of 403
telephone interviews of school administrators, 50% said that there was a shortage.
3
However, only 27% of school systems have an aspiring principal program with urban
schools being better at 50% (ERS, 1998).
Each year the responsibilities of school administrators become increasingly more
complex due to many different factors. One factor is the emphasis on standards and
assessment required by state and federal regulations, laws, and court decisions. Another
is the diversity of children’s needs ranging from the disabled, to the maladjusted, to the
gifted, and all those in between. Parents and community members are demanding that
they be more involved in their child’s education than they were in the past. The
knowledge, skills and requirements for children to succeed in the modern world have
created a need for school leaders to be better prepared not only as instructional leaders,
but also school managers. As Fullan (1998) says, this requires not only restructuring, but
also re-culturing.
Statement of the Problem
A multi-faceted approach is required to address the complexities in today’s
schools. No longer does it suffice for school administrators to complete a college
program to prepare for school leadership (Sergiovanni, 1995). It also doesn’t appear to
be adequate preparation for an educator to “learn out in the field,” This raises the
question if there is a process composed of a variety of learning experiences that will
develop K-12 school administrators into leaders who have the leadership skills to develop
schools systems that enable students to grow both academically and socially into positive
contributors to the world society.
4
The problem of this study was to determine if there was a significant difference in
the perceived preparation of school administrators and in the mentoring activities of
supervising administrators in (I) the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) Tntfmship
program and (2) the internship included as part of the regular university administrator
training program. Perceptions of interns and supervising (mentor) administrators in both
situations were examined.
Requirements for certification according to the State Accreditation Standards
(OPI, 1999) as a school administrator in the state of Montana include a Master’s degree
that is completed while a member of a cohort, as an individual student, or as an OPI
intern working in a school system. Principal certification is given for grades K-8, 5-12
and K-12. For superintendent certification, additional courses are required. The Montana
University System prepares the aspiring administrator with a structured program that
varies somewhat by institution. The programs are offered in many different modes
including summer, weekend, and on-line computer courses. An internship experience is
required by Montana State University. The University of Montana administrative
candidates may participate in an internship as part of their program, but it is not required
(MSU, UM, 1999).
Some aspiring administrators enroll in courses for their administrative
certification while they are teaching school or working outside of education. Others
participate in the OPI internship program in which the aspiring administrator is in effect
employed as a school administrator. In this situation, the school district has been given
permission by the Montana State Office of Public Instruction to use this alternative
5
approach while the person is completing their certification as a school administrator.
According to Don Freshour5OPI Certification Officer, the Office of Public
Instruction Internship5or OPI Intern Program as it is commonly Icnown5has evolved over
the course of the last ten years originating with a federal grant. Since its inception the
program has continued to be a viable option to meet the needs of school districts that
were unable to find a principal or superintendent or who chose to hire and develop their
own principal/superintendent prior to the administrator being certified (Freshour5 1999).
The OPI intern is bound by an official contract between the school district, the
administrative candidate (intern), the supervising university, and OPI. The intern must
have been admitted into an approved university program leading to the appropriate
administrative endorsement and must have completed at least eight semester credits prior
to beginning the first intern academic year. The OPI intern has three years in which to
complete graduate credit in school administration to qualify for Montana administrative
certification. The school district must provide a variety of experiences for the intern who
will be compensated for part-time or full-time administrative work. The district provides
funds toward university tuition, supervision by the university, professional dues and
expenses, and also agrees to retain the intern for up to three years based on satisfactory
performance. The school must also assign an on-site administrator to be a mentor for the
intern. The university’s role is to provide a supervisor for the intern who must visit at
least three times per semester during the school year, and appropriate course work to
complete certification requirements within the three years. Much of the course work
takes place during the summer with some courses offered on weekends and on-line. The
6
OPI exempts the school district from the state standards certification requirements for this
particular administrative position during the three-year period (OPI, 1999).
Research Questions to Re Answered
The OPI intern program is an alternate path to administration. The format has
been used for at least 10 years. However, there has not been research on how well
administrative skill competencies have been developed. Therefore, to accomplish the
purpose of this study, the following questions were answered.
1.
To what degree do OPI interns as compared to regular university interns perceive
that their internship prepared them in selected administrative competencies?
2.
To what degree do mentor administrators perceive that the internship prepared the
OPI intern or regular university intern in selected administrative competencies?
3.
To what extent were the mentoring activities of Relationship Emphasis,
Information Emphasis and Facilitative Focus by mentor administrators part of both the
OPI and the regular interns training as an administrator?
4.
Do selected variables, such as intern’s school district size, and the level of the
completed internship (elementary, grades K-8; high school, grades 9-12; and
K-12)
have an effect on degree of competency on selected administrative skills?
5.
What career decisions did the OPI interns and regular university administrative
interns make after the internship?
7
Significance of the Study
Sergiovanni (1995), in his text on the principalship, states that the new
dimensions of leadership in schools involve leading change to facilitate the
implementation of innovations to improve academic learning. To do this, there must be
skills in both leadership and management. Leadership includes “mission, direction,
inspiration” while management involves “designing and carrying out plans, getting things
done, working effectively with people.” Developing an effective principal, i.e. school
administrator, means doing both (Fullan, 1991).
How are these leadership and management skills developed? According to Fullan
(1991), people change by doing new things in conjunction with others. Nearly all leaders
are highly proficient in learning from experience. Most were able to identify a small
number of mentors and key experiences that powerfully shaped their philosophies,
personalities and operating style.... Learning is the essential fuel for the leader... Very
simply, those who do not learn do not long survive as leaders.”
Haller and Brent (1997) stated that there is very little research regarding the
efficacy of administrator training programs. They allude that perhaps administrator
training programs are not quality programs and, therefore, educators do not enroll or
having completed their programs, do not have the competencies needed to do the work.
Is experiential learning through different types of internships an effective school
leadership development practice?
8
To conduct a study of leadership development, a determination had to be made as
to what standards and skills would be used to determine administrative competency.
Hoyle, English, and Steffy (1998) clarified a set of administrative standards and skills as
described in their book. Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. Their goal was
to establish a useful set of standards that contains skills that every administrator should
possess. These education leaders were committed to developing standards to “stimulate
thinking about the preparation and licensure of school leaders for the 2 Tt century to
ensure that our school administrators are successful leaders of high-performing schools
for all students.”
Using these 10 administrative skills as a standard for school administrators, this
study determined if there is a difference in skill attainment Idvel between OPI interns and
RU (regular university) interns from their own perceptions and from those of their mentor
administrators. The results indicated whether one or both intern programs were effective.
If the OPI program was as effective as the regular program, then school boards may
consider the OPI program as an alternate means by which administrative vacancies can be
filled.
By examining the competency level on the administrative skills, universities and
school districts can determine if the prospective school administrator is proficient as well.
If interns, OPI and RU, perceive that they have attained competency on the skills and that
their mentors support this, then again, university and school districts can feel confident in
the preparation of these interns.
9
In internships, mentors play roles of being a trusted advisor, an information
source, and a facilitator to assist with an intern’s plans. The results of this study can give
direction to university programs in what skill instruction is needed to best prepare future
school administrators.
In Montana there is a shortage of school administrators as stated by Loran Frazier
(2000), executive director of the School Administrators of Montana. He reported that
there were 45 superintendent and 57 principal openings for the 1999-2000 school year.
Two of those positions were not filled. In several instances one superintendent filled the
superintendent position in two school districts. There were also three principal positions
filled with teachers who had no administrative preparation. In the MSBA study (1999) of
school board chairs reporting 39 indicated that there were not enough applicants and 23
stated that applicants were not well qualified (p.32).
Findings from this study can be examined, discussed and integrated with findings
from other studies to provide guidance in developing a best practice in the preparation of
interns to be school administrators. With the help of information from this study, a
collaborative administrator preparation model could be developed between school
districts and the university whose goal would be to prepare skilled administrators for
Montana schools.
10
Definition of Term s
The following terms, which are used throughout the study, are defined below.
Regular University Intern (RU Intern): A student who is completing an internship as part
of an administrative preparation program that leads to the attainment of an administrator
certificate as a principal and/or superintendent. Referred to in this paper as the RU intern.
Supervising Administrator: The principal or superintendent of a school who has been
designated as the on-site supervisor for the OPI intern or regular university intern.
Office of Public Instruction (OPI): The state education office that administers Montana’s
K-12 school program.
OPI Intern: An educator who has been accepted and is participating in the administrator
preparation program called the OPI Internship Program.
Mentor or Mentor Administrator: Synonymous with supervising administrator.
Administrator: An educator who is a K-12 educator working as a certified elementary
principal, middle school principal, high school principal, or superintendent.
Elementary Principal: An educator who is certified by OPI to be administrator of Grades
Kindergarten through 8th grade.
High School Principal: An educator who is certified by OPI to be an administrator in
Grades 7-12 or 5-12 but most generally works in Grades 9-12.
K-12 Principal or Administrator: An educator who is certified by OPI to be an
administrator in grades Kindergarten through 12th Grade.
11
AAJA School: This classification, based on athletic/activity groups, ranges in high
school student population from 370 and above.
B/C School: This classification, based on high school athletic/activity grouping, ranges in
high school student population from I to 369.
Methodology
This research used a quantitative approach in which group effects were the focus
rather than individual differences. The participants in this study were the population of
OPI interns, a random sample of regular university interns, and the mentor administrators
of both the OPI and RU interns who were involved during the time period, 1995-1999.
There were two instruments, one for administrative skills and the other for
mentoring activities. Both groups of interns and their mentors completed the two
instruments. Using a five-point Likert scale, the interns responded with their perceptions
about their own administrative skills developed during the internship and about the
mentoring activities of their mentors. The mentors gave their perception of their own
intern’s administrative skills and of their personal mentoring activities.
Data was analyzed according to the whole population and then subgroups of
different school sizes, AA/A and B/C, and school levels. Grades K-8, elementary. Grades
9-12, high school and Grades K-12. To obtain appropriate statistical data, a two-factor
ANOVA was used.
Descriptive data was gathered from the study’s participants through open-ended
questions included as part of the survey instrument. This demographic information was
12
used to describe the participants and provide information about their education, career
choices, years in education, and interest in a potential follow-up telephone interview.
13
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
Both the MSBA study (1999) and a national study conducted by Educational
Research Service (1998) indicate there is a shortage of school administrators,
superintendents and principals, that will be even more acute in the future when many
school leaders retire. Although a statewide education profile (Nielson, et ah, 1999)
reported that in the year 1996-97 teachers were distributed across the age ranges in a
balanced manner, administrator age distribution in that same report suggested that 50% of
principals and 60% of superintendents in the state of Montana would be new to their
position within 10 years or 2007. There is evidence that a high demand for new school
administrators across the state already exists.
Preparing new K-12 school administrators is a task that requires understanding of
not only current leadership theory but also organization theory and change. Schools have
changed to mirror societal change, which has given impetus to a rapid growth in the body
of research and literature that gives direction to today’s school leaders. The Icnowledge
gained must then be integrated into the school setting as it is today and is predicted to be
in the future.
Adult learning theory includes learning from books and learning from life’s
experiences. Combining the two, in which adults develop their own meaning from their
•
14
learning, supports the constructivist view that appears to be part of learning for all ages.
In the process of reflecting on experiences the mentor, or guide, gives perspective that
assists the adult learner in making sense of their own learning. Therefore, administrator
preparation programs are concentrating not only on theory but also on practice in the
school setting guided by a mentor in whom the aspiring administrator finds support and
challenge. This literature review is to develop a framework and provide insight into the
key elements of this study.
Leadership
Leadership in education has changed over the years. Schools are no longer seen
as bureaucratic institutions in which teachers are treated like factory workers in a topdown hierarchy of autocratic management. School leaders, faced with diverse
expectations of the public, parents and students, need to prepare new leadership models
that will be able to satisfy constituents (Spillane and Regnier, 1998). Taking a lesson
from business and industry, Peter Drucker (1985) says that one must optimize not just
maximize. Schools, in optimizing, need to precisely identify their mission, set goals
accordingly, and measure their progress regularly. To maximize, trying to do many
things while trying to serve many different constituencies, has not been successful for
business and will not work for schools either (Drucker, 1985).
Therefore instead of directing workers, the modern school leader understands that
leaders of today’s schools must have the skills and experiences to solve problems and
build programs that are committed to children, teaching, and teachers (Sergiovanni,
15
1995). Today, and in the future, school leaders must understand that “To lead is to
influence others to achieve mutually agreed upon and socially valued goals that help an
organization stretch to a higher level. Leading does not mean moving people through
time in a status quo environment” (Patterson, 1997).
As Fullan states, “The school principal as a leader should strive not to be an
instructional leader, but rather a leader of instructional leaders.” In order to accomplish
the appropriate changes so that others in schools can effect positive changes, school
leaders must be able to express their own vision but not impose it. School leaders must
be able to manage conflict and to solve the problems that may arise. At the same time
school leaders must remain open to the ideas of those who are at all working levels of the
school system, both professional and classified staff (Fullan, 1992).
Organization Theory
Leadership has changed over the years not so much because organizations have
changed but because research findings have clarified how organizations operate. In the
beginning of the study of organizations, it was thought that these entities were closed
systems with no connection to the outside environment. As researchers studied the
activities and operations of organizations, they made some very important discoveries.
Organizations were systems that were open to and interacted with the environment, were
social entities, and were dynamic in that they were constantly changing as in disequilibria
(Hoy and Misled, 1991).
16
The organization, furthermore, was made up of many different components in
which each played a different role in the organization’s function. People who made up
organizations such as schools, acted according to their own individual needs (Hoy and
Miskel, 1991) in reference to Maslow’s theory that people act according to a hierarchy of
needs that he identified as physiological, safety, social, self-esteem, and self-realization.
As basic needs are filled, people will strive to meet their own higher level needs in a
developmental sequence. The needs at a lower stage must be fulfilled before a person can
move on to a higher stage (Hoy and Miskel, 1991).
Another researcher, Herzberg, in his research in the 1960’s found that work
achievement and responsibility motivated workers more than monetary or tangible
rewards. From this basis came the work of Hersey and Blanchard (1977) in situational
leadership and then the concepts of Total Quality Management (TQM) developed by W.
Edwards Deming. Deming, in TQM, stressed that improving the quality of the system
which is made up of inputs, processes, outputs and the environment surrounding the
system, could influence a worker’s motivation and therefore production (Schwahn and
Spady, 1998).
Not only must school leaders be knowledgeable in and understand the functioning
of an organization, they must also be able to put that knowledge into practice to develop
effective organizations. Administrator preparation programs must be designed to develop
a school leader who not only has the knowledge but also has the practice in implementing
organizational components in excellent schools. In an interview, John Goodlad told
Goldberg (2000) that to develop a quality school administrator there should be a
17
continuation of the best training available. The command of the change, process and
skills to be able to work with people are both more important than technical skill
development. Using their people skills, administrators can build leadership within their
own schools so that as they leave, there is already a trained administrator to replace them
(Goldberg, 2000).
Change in Schools
School superintendents and principals must also understand the processes by
which schools achieve quality and excellence. Teachers and other school personnel will
transform their school to provide for the needs of children not by staying the same but by
changing their beliefs, their thinking and their actions. In order for this to happen in an
orderly way, the change process itself must be understood and facilitated with each
individual at each stage of his/her development. The change that is desired must be
lasting system change and not the simple shallowness of event change (Patterson, 1997).
Patterson illustrates organizational change with three concentric circles (see
Figure I). The inner circle is system change. It is central to the change and is very
powerful as it affects the norms, values and power relationships in the entire organization.
This is called systemic change. It appears that system change is necessary in order to
have a long-term meaningful change in the organization. The example used by Patterson
(1997) is the concept of a middle school. In order to make it different from the junior
high model, the norms, values and power relationships must change. Otherwise, the
result is only an unchanged junior high model.
18
A middle school will develop only when teachers realize that middle school
children have different needs than younger or older students. Teachers must construct
learning environments that capitalize on cooperative learning and individualized help
provided within an integrated curriculum across subject areas. Teachers must understand
and then design their teaching to support middle school students’ specific learning styles
and needs.
The second circle from the center is program change. This level of change affects
the norms and values of some parts of the school without having a major impact on the
entire school. An example would be the Accelerated Reader program that helps students
learn to read with meaning and understanding using technology as an instrument. The
program can operate with minor changes that do not include changes in the school culture
or values. Program change is often the result when schools don’t quite get to the system
changes that they designed.
19
The outer circle is event change. This level of change is very shallow and has no
lasting effect on the norms, values, or power within the school. The changes are
generally only single occurrences with no connection to the history or the future of the
school. Often school people continue to operate as usual even though there may be the
facade of change that takes place when a particular principal or superintendent requires
something to happen with no buy-in from the teaching staff. Event change happens when
school people continue to operate as they have always done because the changes are often
cosmetic and don’t have any underlying meaning. An example of this is a school that
works to change the way science is taught from a lecture method to a hands-on method
without the staff development to actually change teacher and student behavior (Patterson,
1997).
Hall and Hord, in studying change extensively, have given great insight into what
must happen before a significant and lasting difference in an individual’s behavior will
occur. Their program of organization and personal change, called the Concerns Based
Adoption Model or CBAM, provides the basis for the statement that “change is a process,
not an event.” The process as we Icnow it occurs over time, usually at least a year, and is
accomplished by individuals not by events. It is only when people in a system have
absorbed and used the improved practice can it be said that change has actually occurred.
Change will occur differently for each individual according to the change that is being
sought (Hall and Hord, 1987).
When a person changes, developmental growth occurs. The skills and feelings
seem to shift as an individual passes through more and greater degrees of experience.
20
The best way for change to occur is to have it be in operational terms. How will it affect
me as to what and how I need to do tasks? The real part of any change must be human,
not a new program or a new book. Change happens when people change their behavior.
Behavior changes occur more readily when the facilitator of the proposed changes
recognizes a person’s needs and goes about developing the behaviors required in an
• adaptive and systematic way. In this way, the school leader, the facilitator of this
proposed change will be able to maximize the results for success and achievement (Hall
and Hord, 1987).
Individuals who want to become a school administrator must change their ways of
thinking, their processes and their practices. Speaking in change terms, the school
administrator must first be changed through the facilitation process in order to have the
skills to be able to facilitate change in others. In a school setting facilitated change of an
educator can take place through a mentor-mentee relationship. The mentor has many
opportunities to influence and guide the intellectual, affective and career development of
the aspiring administrator (Cohen, 1995).
It is important to remember in the change process that if attention is focused on
the concerns of those who are asked to make the change, the change will take place more
quickly and with better results. Change is a very complex process and the demands of the
process are imposed at every level of the system. Innovations are not easy and when
events seem like single items, in actuality they may be bundles of many components that
complicate the process of effective management (Hall and Hord, 1987).
21
Schools of the Future
An effective leader with strong management skills who understands changes
describes the superintendent of the future. He or she will be a reflective thinker, have a
broad learning base, and be comfortable in both the worlds of practical activities and of
ideas and concepts, state Spillane and Regnier (1998), nationally recognized school
superintendents. To understand what is required to become a futuristic school leader
requires that we examine what has changed in education, what is changing and what will
change.
According to Spillane and Regnier (1998), the following are examples of what has
changed in education:
1.
In governance, there is much more state involvement with politicians
talcing more control and having more influence at all levels, local, state and federal.
2.
Community control has moved toward decentralization and more parent
input. However, in some areas the parent council programs have not fared well resulting
in a noticeable return to centralized management.
3.
Superintendents must become instructional leaders instead of school
managers because they are expected to lead the way in the classroom and in making
instructional decisions. More women and more minority individuals are represented.
4.
Special Education, a program good for children, has gone from nothing to
c
the largest budget, making it very expensive to local taxpayers.
22
5.
Teacher training and professional development have become more
rigorous and realistic. Even when this training is shown to be necessary to instructional
program success, the public is often still critical and reluctant to provide financial
support. In contrast, businesses have found training to be essential to prosper. They fund
it and require it.
6.
Minimum competency testing was a central theme of the 70’s and 80’s.
Now in an era of standards, accountability and high stakes testing, Americans believe that
our students can do as well as any student in the world if we expect and demand it.
7.
Today student populations are made up of more minorities, low socio­
economic, limited English proficiency, and immigrant students than 30 years ago.
Taxpayers are not willing to fund public education because today’s student population
does not look like them.
8.
Incentives for teacher performance and merit pay have been suggested but
are often viewed negatively with little agreement as what should be done.
9.
Privatization is popular. More and more parents feel like their children are
not getting what they need in the public school and besides, the government can do
nothing very well anyway.
10.
At Federal levels some specialized and minority programs have been
implemented, but have not become great factors in curriculum or operation of schools.
Spillane and Regnier (1998) go on to describe what is changing in education right
now as well as what they predict will change in the future.
23
1.
National standards and assessments are coming from Capitol Hill politics
and are exerting a great deal of pressure. Superintendents, as school leaders, should
always support strong accountability for student achievement.
2.
National professional teaching standards along with national teacher
certification will strengthen educator credibility and expertise in the eyes of the public.
3.
Use of technology will open new learning opportunities for educators and
students. However the critical areas are still books, reading, writing and math.
What will change in the field of education in the future? The following
predictions by Spillane and Regnier (1998) are listed below.
1.
National assessments will not be supported except by a few parents in
some schools. However, some parents in some schools will pressure their schools to
meet higher standards, thereby pressuring other schools to meet higher standards.
2.
In both academic achievement and job skills, standards will be higher for
both college and non-college standards.
3.
Privatization and choice will develop within public schools, including
charter schools, vouchers, tax credits and more home schools, which will result in
pressure on superintendents for more accountability.
4.
Special Education will narrow its focus to help children instead of
placating parents.
All of the above changes and proposed changes will affect the preparation of
school.administrators. “There will be more standards for preparing superintendents for
24
the job rather than just moving up the ranks.” As a result, this insures more quality
control and will satisfy school boards (Spillane and Regnier, 1998).
With a base of good, solid traditional education, superintendents can develop
skills of thinking thoroughly and quickly about complex issues that will require current
Icnowledge not only in education but also in the sciences, world politics, cultural trends
and business. Work is accomplished in schools by choosing the right people and
motivating them for excellent work. In the future it will be critical for a school
superintendent to be able to work with personnel and the community to accommodate
their needs and garner support. Even though understanding the budget is absolutely
necessary, the main goal remains academic learning for students, for which leadership
skills are essential. The superintendent’s work is three-fold: set standards, establish
measures, and hold people accountable (Spillane and Regnier, 1998).
Adult Learning
In order to lead schools, superintendents of the future will need vigorous pre­
service preparation and ongoing training using sound adult learning principles and
techniques. Developing competent school principals and superintendents involves
understanding how to teach adults and how adults learn.
The situated learning approach is effective for adults because in it knowledge and
skills are developed in the context of how Icnowledge is gained and applied in everyday
situations. The basis for this learning approach comes from situated cognition theory that
25
defines learning as a sociocultural phenomenon instead of the acquisition of knowledge
through books, other printed text or classroom delivery (Stein, 1998).
From work that has been done on adult learning, particularly with college-aged
students and older, it has been found that active learning, the participation of the student
in the lesson, improves the chances that the student will actually learn the material.
Interactions with the student assist in adult learning, as do discussions, role-playing,
simulations and student presentations (Menges and Weimer, 1996).
Situated learning experiences are built on four major premises: I) Learning results
from normal everyday activities, (2) Knowledge gained from specific situations by the
student is then transferred to other similar situations, (3) Learning does not take place in
isolation but is social and includes processes of “thinking, perceiving, problem solving
and interacting” that an adult utilizes in addition to general and operational knowledge,
(4) Learning is not separate from active, complex social activities made up of people,
their actions and situations (Stein, 1998). Adult learners, because they have a variety of
backgrounds, are able to relate stories, data and situations by which they enhance their
learning and reflect upon situations in order to understand them within the context of real
community and workplace happenings (Kerka, 1998).
Oftentimes, situated learning takes place in the workplace in the form of an
internship. The internship, as most are set up, involves a mentor relationship. The
definition of mentoring includes a relationship between an experienced and a less
experienced person in which the mentor provides guidance, advice, support and feedback
to the mentee. The skills developed in a mentoring relationship are not only work-related
26
but also are cultural, and enhance appreciation and the potential of different aspects of a
person s life (Kerka, 1998). Additionally, for the student to really come to understand
oneself and become a reflective learner, a mentor can be of great assistance. Universities
are working on including mentors in many different programs to allow for greater sharing
of Icnowledge by the professor with the student (Menges and Weimer, 1996).
Mentoring
As with many concepts, mentoring has changed to meet the needs of
organizations. The people, now.in mentored relationships, are well educated but are still
in need of a mentor for practical knowledge and wisdom. The ancient process of the
beginners developing new skills from their elders is still a viable method to transmit
“craft knowledge” that can best be acquired experientially. Many organizations, as
attested to by The Mentoring Institute (1999), have found mentorships to be useful
particularly in working with women and minorities (Kerka, 1998).
Mentoring is supportive of current learning theories that state that the “socially
constructed nature of learning and the importance of experiential, situated learning
experiences” (Kerka, 1998) is how people learn. Experts or mentors can help one to learn
by modeling problem-solving strategies and guiding learners to solve and think about
problems while they are reflecting upon their own way of working through their own
thought processes. As this occurs, mentors can coach learners with aids and scaffolds
that are timely for the particular situation. With practice and assistance, the learner
becomes more adept and develops the confidence to problem solve successfully so that
27
the mentor can decrease his/her assistance. The learners internalize their own thought
and skill processes and construct their own knowledge and understanding as they see it.
Mentors are experts who can provide authentic, real experience learning along with a
personal relationship with another through which the social side of learning can take
place” (Kerka, 1998).
An example of this concept is adult birds that guide their young in leaving the
nest. They support, help problem solve and have the courage to let the learner fail. In a
mentoring relationship the mentee can go beyond the basic Icnowledge and skills to put
these aspects into practice so that the link-up between basic learning and the job is very
rapid resulting in a learner who can apply knowledge quickly and accurately to work
situations (Kerka, 1998).
Another aspect of the mentorship is the relationship of trust that develops between
the mentor and mentee. This trust provides a safe place for the learner to try on new
roles, make decisions, and practice their ideas and understandings. This process is much
more real-life than the classroom situation in which the activities are temporary and
short-term. Real life practice gives one the opportunity to actually develop and hone
one’s practical skills while applying the principles and knowledge of the textbook (Kerka,
1998). Galbraith and Cohen (1995) state that mentoring provides two basic functions: (I)
career/instrumental: benefit from mentor’s knowledge, contacts, support and guidance,
and (2) psycho-social: internal value of the dialogue with another: collaborative critical
thinking, planning, reflection and feedback.
28
Mentorships are often used in training women. It appears that the psychosocial,
relational learning is more of a team approach, rather than authoritarian, which women
seem to favor. It is through relationships that women have opportunities to learn their
company’s cultural processes that gives them both cognitive and experiential learning.
Other researchers found that mentoring helps an individual to become personally
introduced and socialized into the workplace culture, thus giving them critical exposure
to both work and academic settings. Sometimes in this same context the relationship may
stifle the mentee’s growth. It appears from research that there is less satisfaction if the
mentor and the mentee are not similar in areas of gender, race and ethnic backgrounds.
Even though there is some doubt that this makes a difference, the mentor must be
sensitive to different cultural perspectives that may influence one’s openness to others’
way of behaving and thinking. Kerka (1998) concludes that in developing learning
.organizations, mentoring can give important assistance in helping people develop their
potential.
In the business world, mentoring is recognized by many companies as being
critical to the development and succession in the leadership ranks. It is noted on “The
Mentoring Institute’s” website that most do not make it to the top without being mentored
along the way. In a work position success often depends on conforming to social norms,
assimilation to standards, adhering to rules and customs of the organization. To improve
work opportunities, finding a good mentor helps one succeed so Glickman (1995) also
supports the practice that mentees help to choose their own mentor.
In its application to educational as well as business settings, mentoring:
1.
Prepares a talent pool for leadership positions and functions,
2.
Ensures that all quality performers have an opportunity to become leaders,
3.
Provides for continuity (succession planning) while empowering
innovation ideas that prevent stagnation,
4.
Provides for transmission of Imowledge to the next generation,
5.
Broadens the perspectives of interns and their mentors,
6.
Prepares leaders for shifting their way of thinking and operating,
7.
Fills in gaps that they may be in an intern’s preparation (Mentoring
Institute, 1999).
Administrator Preparation
How can administrators in our present and future schools be best prepared to deal
with organizational change? Research seems to support using adult learning research,
and mentor support to develop the leadership skills that can meet the public’s
expectations. The increasing demands on administrators and the schools that prepare
them have not lessened. In fact, during the 1990’s, 60% of our nation’s current school
principals will retire. Not only are there pressures for school administration programs to
produce school leaders for the changing face of education, they must also produce, more
of them and faster. If the 500 or so institutions nation-wide that have administrator
preparation programs do not meet the demand for school leaders, our nation’s school
children will not have the skills to compete in the global economy of the future (Kraus
and Cordeiro, 1995).
30
To answer the above call, many schools and universities have revamped their'
administrator preparation programs. Revised programs can be described as tri­
dimensional. A tri-dimensional model of professional development includes academic
preparation, field-based learning (internship) and professional formation (mentoring,
reflection and personal development) (Daresh and Playko, 1992). The Danforth Program
for Preparation of School Principals has an integrated program that includes internships,
mentoring relationships, reflection activities and student cohorts. The Institute for
Executive Leadership at Lewis and Clark College in Portland, OR was created in 1984.
The content of the course is made up of clinical knowledge in school administration
presented in a holistic way created from practice and understanding. The material is
composed of a cycle of experience, feedback, reflection and understanding.
The goal of these revised programs, as Schon noted, was to enable school
administrators to become “managers of culture.” To do this, administrative students
learned more educational foundation theory in the context of a liberal arts focus in order
to become leaders who developed the common good. By using learning journals and
developing practical skills while working in a student cohort, school administrators
learned that by utilizing a cycle of experience, feedback, and reflection upon their skills
and practice, they could become the moral, instructional and community leaders needed
in their school (Schmuck, 1992).
Research that was done in 1995 at the request of Montana’s Certification,
Standards and Practices Advisory Committee examined the worth of internships in the
development of school principals. Specifically, first-year principals and their
31
superintendents were asked whether principals who had done an internship in their
professional preparation were better prepared for their first year as a principal. The study
indicated the difference was statistically significant that first-year principals who had an
■internship felt better prepared than those who did not. However, the superintendents who
worked with these principals did not note a difference in the skills of principals with
intern experience and those without (Jean and Evans, 1995).
Skills that the Jean and Evans (1995) study found most important to the principals
who had completed internships were those skills that are generally considered critical to
success as a school administrator: supervision and evaluation of teachers, budget
management, communication, team building, and facilitating school progress. These
leadership tasks require mentorship and coaching in addition to the textbook and class
content of their university courses. The same study indicated that principals support the
notion that some leadership skills are better learned through modeling and practice just as
student teachers learn to teach.
In the 1999 MSBA-sponsored study, it was also found that there was great school
board and superintendent support of the OPI internships that are currently offered in
Montana. School board chairs and superintendents indicated their desire to expand the
OPI program for better leadership preparation as well as use the OPI program to address
the current and projected shortage of school administrators in Montana (MSBA, 1999).
The Jean and Evans study (1995) also recommended that more study be given to
the use of internships and mentoring aspects in the development of future Montana school
leaders with consideration given to requiring such an activity as prerequisite to
32
certification as an administrator. To do this will require more academic focus and
support from Montana’s university educational administration programs.
The Education Research Study sponsored by the National Association of
Elementary and Secondary Principals (1998) also indicates that there are innovative
programs at the university level to prepare new school principals and superintendents to
be well prepared candidates for open positions. From the LIFTS program in New York,
to the “grow your own” model in Kansas, to the PEPS program in North Carolina and
Montana’s OPI Intern program, universities and foundations are developing school
administrator preparation programs built on collaborative models between K-12 schools
and universities. Almost all of these programs contain university courses, internships,
mentors and cohorts of students.
For a number of years, the Danforth Foundation of St. Louis, Missouri, has
provided planning, preparation and funding to the Universities of California State Fresno,
Alabama, Central Florida, Connecticut, New Mexico and Washington. These programs
included administrative skill development through collaboration among university
departments of educational administration, local school districts, and the foundation.
Their goals include the following: improving collaboration between universities and
school districts, providing high quality administrative candidates with more minority
representatives, using adult learning methods, providing on-site experiences (most
internships are at least 300 hours or one-half time for a year), and involving other college
departments. This contrasts with traditional internships of only 90-150 hours at Montana
33
State University (Chambers, 1999). Each intern program includes a candidate selection
program, an internship, a mentor on-site who is given training, and a program facilitator.
In a critical article, Haller, Brent and McNamara (1997) state that proof is lacldng
that graduate training in educational administration improves schools. However,
educators respond that since there seems to be a lack of studies concerning the efficacy of
administrative preparation program, continued research and development of quality
programs is even more important (Dembowski, 1998).
Thus it can be seen that the literature on the development of school administrators
includes a complex mix of theories of leadership, management of change processes,
understanding how organizations function and hopefully thrive, plus adult learning and
mentoring. What role each of these components play in the preparation of today’s
superintendents and principals is difficult to assess because there doesn’t appear to be
much research especially in the state of Montana.
From current discussion with education leader, John Goodlad (Goldberg, 2000),
what is needed is training in working with people and improving instruction which
requires extensive work in the change process, leadership and how schools as
organizations function.
Recommendations of researchers Goodman and Zimmerman (2000) conducted
through a grant to the New England School Development Council on board/
superintendent collaboration for high student achievement, suggest that most university
programs must change their administrator preparation programs to address current school
issues. The critical changes that were recommended were I) making the superintendent
34
(administrator) position more appealing through development of leadership and
collaboration skills, 2) development and recruitment of teachers who exhibit leadership
potential must be a priority, and 3) superintendents must be better prepared for their jobs
in their initial graduate programs.
This study also stated that superintendents need to be recruited and trained to meet
yet to be developed national professional standards. If schools were to choose those
teachers with leadership potential and support them during their training through jointly
planned programs developed by school districts and universities, the school would then
have a reason to invest in administrative training and provide for high quality internships.
Because of the collaboration and investment of both school and administrator-in-training
programs, there will be a way to fill positions of administrators who retire. This would
help to reduce administrator shortage.
The university role would be to develop quality programs of study and “articulate
them with carefully planned and supervised internships.” The result would be a Solid
program that included both academic and clinical work over a several year period with
the mentorship of the school’s superintendent and school board. The administrative
candidate would study as well as provide administrative services to the school that are
paid for by the district resulting in a buy-in by the administrative recruit, the school and
the university (Goodman and Zimmerman, 2000).
35
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a significant difference in
the perceived preparation of school administrators and in the mentoring activities of
supervising administrators in (I) the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) Internship
Program and (2) the internship included as part of the regular university administrator
training program. Perceptions of interns and supervising (mentor) administrators in both
intern programs were examined.
Conceptual Framework
John Goodlad, writing on leadership in A Place Called School, stated, “First, there
should be a continuous district wide effort to identify employees with leadership
potential. Second, the district must be willing to make an investment designed to pay off
in the future.. .(they) should be groomed for the post, paid two-year study leaves, to be
taken at a major university offering a carefully planned program. These programs would
balance academic study and one or more internships as an assistant principal” (Goodlad,
1984).
The learning theory called constructivism describes how what one already knows,
added to experience, creates or constructs one’s own understandings. This theory or
36
model of learning opposes the traditional model of education that Friere called the
“banking” model in which the teacher fills the student with deposits of information. John
Dewey wrote that the notion of experience was part of learning in his explanation that
“education must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience.”
Furthermore, “every experience should do something to prepare a person for later
experiences of a deeper and more expansive quality” (Reed and Johnson, 1996, pp. I l l ,
142).
The theorists, Piaget and Vygotsky, also support experience as a component of
learning. Piaget’s studies describe student learning using hands-on activities and
discovery learning, while Vygotsky stresses that social interactions in groups and shared
settings make learning meaningful (Abdal-Haqq, 1998).
The administrative intern’s K-12 experiences provide additional insight to another
theorist, David Kolb, whose, model of experiential learning developed in 1984 builds on
Dewey and Piaget. Kolb’s four-part cycle of learning defines personal experience as the
basis for finding meaning from which the learner can come to some logical conclusions
(Svinicki and Dixon, 1987).
Reflective learning, as theorized by Schon in i987, describes a constant moving
back and forth from thinking to doing. This study of administrative interns and their
mentor supervisors in the internship may illustrate a “crucial link between theory and
practice enabling learners to reflect critically and philosophically about their own and
each other’s practice.” Schon’s “know-in-action” is the sort of knowledge that principals
use in a “reflection-in-action” that captures the essence of their work in making
37
judgments based on knowledge and experience in new, constantly changing contexts
(Inkster, 1994).
The theorists whose theories and models have been included here
each contribute to current research that learning for individuals,
particularly adults, is based upon personal experiences guided by
knowledge. Each person’s learning appears to be specific to that
individual and to learn one must move through the process at one’s own
pace and build one’s own meaning with which appropriate action can be
taken in new situations and experiences (Fogarty, 1999).
Population Description and Sampling Procedure
The population of this study consisted of I) OPI interns and their supervising
mentor administrator during the years 1995-1999, and 2) regular university program
interns and their supervising administrators in the same period. The latter were either
required to or have elected to complete an internship along with their regular courses to
become a certified school administrator. The Office of Public Instruction identified OPI
interns for this study. The supervising administrators for interns in this group were
identified through the intern’s school district’s records and sponsoring university records.
Regular university interns and supervisors were identified through the sponsoring
university’s intern and mentor administrator records. OPI interns were from both MSU
and the U of M, while RU (regular university) interns were only from MSU. The
decision to not include RU interns from U of M was based on the fact that their Master’s
in School Administration does not require an internship. Such a situation made
identification of potential study participants from the U of M difficult.
38
Instrumentation
The research instruments consisted of two different surveys. One of the
instruments, the mentoring instrument, was taken from the work of Norman H. Cohen
who has published a number of books that describe his studies of mentoring
characteristics and the uses of the Principles of Adult Mentoring Scale that he developed
in 1993 as a part of his doctoral dissertation. There are two versions of the instrument.
This study used the one entitled “Business and Government” as it specifies a
supervisor/employee relationship. Permission was obtained from the author of this
instrument to use it in this research.
Cohen’s instrument consists of six dimensions: Relationship Emphasis,
Information Emphasis, Facilitative Focus, Confrontative Focus, Mentor Model, and
Employee Vision. Only three of the dimensions were used in this study: Relationship
Emphasis, Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus. These areas were selected
based on Cohen’s (1995) statement that the basic foundation of mentoring is made up of
trust (relationship), information, and facilitation. A copy of this instrument and
permission to use the letter from the instrument’s author can be found in Appendix C.
In searching the literature, there did not appear to be a valid and reliable
instrument available that would measure administrative skill competency levels for this
study. Therefore, the instrument developed for this research was derived from the skills
and standards for the preparation of administrators as described in the book, Skills for
Successful 21st Century School Leaders by Hoyle, English and Steffy (1998). These
39
authors used previously set administrative standards and skills from the Interstate School
Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), the American Association of School
Administrators, (AASA), the National Association of Secondary School Principals
(NASSP), and the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP), as
well as the National Council for the Accreditation of Colleges of Education (NCATE)
Curriculum Guidelines for university administrator preparation programs. Ten skill
categories, developed from these sources, provide a set of skills for the preparation of the
successful school administrator in the 21st Century. The categories are: leadership; policy
and governance; communication and community relations; organizational management;
curriculum planning and development; instructional management; staff development;
educational research, evaluation and planning; and values and ethics of leadership.
Eight professors in Educational Administration at Montana State University and
the University of Montana (both have educational administration programs) were chosen
to assist in the development of the administrative skills survey instrument that would be
used in this research. As these individuals have had many years of experience in
educating and. working with school administrators, they were able to help in the selection
of the most important and the most representative skills in which practicing
administrators must be competent. Five professors from MSU and three professors from
UM were asked to examine the listed skills from the Hoyle text and select the three most
important skills in each of the administrative skill categories that they felt needed to be
part of an internship in school administration. Their instructions were to check the three
most important skills from those listed in each category.
40
Six of the professors completed this task. Anonymity of the respondents was
assured by having no means of identifying the respondent other than the postmark. The
specific skills that each professor chose were tabulated in each category. The 3 to 5 skills
chosen most often in each administrative skill category became the Administrative Skill
Instrument for use in this study. The number of skills selected for the instrument in each
category varied from 3 to 5 due to some ties in the 10 competency or standards
categories. A copy of the Administrative Skills Instrument, is found in Appendix A.
Validity and Reliability
The validity of the Administrative Skills Instrument was supported by the national
educational organizations and author expertise in K-12 school administration. Further
validation came from MSU and UM education administration professors whose first three
choices of competencies in each skill area identified 3 to 5 competencies in each of the 10
administrative categories.
The mentor instrument, developed by Norman H. Cohen (1993) defined the
mentor role through six behavioral scales developed from analysis of adult education
literature. In the development of each scale, experts in research design, scale construction
and statistical analysis guided the process to develop a valid mentor instrument.
Reliability analysis, a test of internal consistency on the item statements, computed on a
scale between 0 and I was determined to have an alpha of .9609 for the Principles of
Adult Mentoring Scale. Business and Government version (Cohen, 1995).
41
The author of this instrument stated in a telephone conversation that it has been
used as an entire survey or in separate scales or several scales together. In this study
three scales were used: Relationship Emphasis, Informative Emphasis, and Facilitative
Focus.
The Relationship Emphasis scale focuses on how the mentor develops a
foundation through listening and accepting of the intern’s ideas and emotions. This helps
to create a climate in which there is sharing and reflection on personal experiences, a
climate of trust (Cohen, 1995). The Informative Emphasis section stresses the
importance of the mentor offering detailed responses and specific suggestions to the
intern based on the mentor’s expert Icnowledge in the field. Expertise pertains
specifically to education, training and career goals. The Facilitative Focus section helps
the intern reflect upon and consider options, and alternate views in making decisions
about their own career, current work situations and the understanding of their own
beliefs. This focus can then become the basis for determining attainable goals.
After the Administrative Skills Instrument components were selected, a randomly
selected group of interns and a randomly selected group of administrators were chosen to
determine the reliability of the instrument using the test-retest method. The proposed
Administrative Skills Instrument was sent to 20 administrators and 20 administrative
interns. Interns were chosen from a list of only those who had graduated from Montana
State University and therefore had completed internships. Administrators were chosen
from individuals who were currently principals and superintendents in K-12 schools in
Montana and who had supervised an administrative intern.
42
To those returning the completed instrument, the same instrument was mailed a
second time with identical instructions. Interns were asked to circle the response that best
describes the degree of competency achieved during their administrative internship in
each skill area. Mentors were asked to respond on the basis of the skills attained during
the administrative internship of the last administrative intern whom they supervised. The
Pearson’s correlation coefficient measure was determined for each administrative skill
competency area. The reliability of the Administrative Skills Instrument was tabulated
by the 10 competency categories. (See Appendix B for Administrative Skills Instrument!
Administrative Skills Instrument Reliability
Table 1
Returns:
Interns=
Administrators
16/20
14/18
80%
78%
Interns
Skill Areas Correlation
1
0.856
2
0.794
3
0.913
4
0.508
5
0.920
6
0.901
7
0.770
8
0.919
9
0.905
10
0.455
Administrators
Skill Areas
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Correlations
0.823
0.885
0.735
■ 0.914
0.632
0.668
0,868
0.692
0.867
0.604
When there is a small population, it is difficult to get correlations that are at .75 and above.
Very low variability (1-5 Likert scale) makes it difficult to get good reliability.
43
Data Collection
Four different groups, OPI interns, regular university (RU) interns, OPI mentor
administrators, and RU mentor administrators completed the Administrative ,Slcilk
Instrument and the Mentoring Instrument. Each survey contained a section in which
written responses were requested that identified the individual as a male or female, the
size of school, AAJA school or a B/C school where they did their internship or were a
mentor, and the level at which they were a mentor or intern: elementary, high school or
K-12. OPI interns for the years 1995-1999 were identified from records of the
certification office of the Montana Office of Public Instruction. .The regular university
interns, during the same time frame, were randomly selected from graduate student lists
provided by Montana State University where internships are required as part of the school
administration program. These interns’ mentor administrators were determined from the
lists of interns and their mentor administrators from Montana State University (MSU) or
by the school administrator currently at that internship location if the mentor
administrator was not identified in the MSU listing of administrative interns.
A letter with instructions and the surveys were mailed to the four groups: OPI
interns, mentors of OPI interns, RU, regular university interns, and mentors of the RU
interns. Using a 5-point Likert scale, all interns were asked to respond on the
Administrative Sldlls Instrument in terms of the competency level they felt they had
personally achieved during their internship. The values on the scale were; 1= not at all
44
competent, 2 somewhat competent, 3—competent, 4—very competent, 5=extremely
competent.
The OPI mentor administrators and regular mentor administrators were requested
to respond to the Administrative Skills Instrument as to the competency level attained by
the intern whom they had supervised. This was done to provide a comparison of overall
intern perceptions of their own competency and their mentor administrator’s perception
of their intern’s competency.
On the mentoring instrument, both groups of interns were asked to respond as to
the mentoring activities received from their mentor administrator in the areas of
Relationship Emphasis, Informative Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus. Responses were
in the form of a five point Likert scale with 1= Never, 2=Inffequently, 3=Sometimes,
4=Frequently, 5=Always. The mentor administrators were also asked to respond to the
mentoring instrument by judging their own mentoring activities with their intern in the
same three areas on the same instrument. Some administrators had supervised more than
I intern in the past 5 years. In the interest of consistency and to protect identities, the
administrators were, asked to respond to the competency skills and mentoring activities of
the last intern they had supervised.
As part of the demographic information requested at the beginning of the survey
instrument, the participants were asked if they would participate in a telephone interview.
In these cases the respondent wrote their name or gave their telephone number so that
they could be contacted.
45
Demographic questions were also asked. These included questions' about how
long the participant had been in education, gender, was their Master’s degree in school
administration, how long were they an administrator, in what administrative position did
they serve, how long did they plan to continue in their position, and would they consent
to a phone interview if needed.
Hypotheses
The independent variables (variables X) were group membership, OPI or regular
intern; AAJA and B/C school size where internships were served; and level (Grades K-8,
elementary. Grades 9-12, high school, and K-12) where internships were served. The
dependent variables (variables Y) were the perception of both interns and their
supervising administrators of the degree to which the 10 skill competencies and the
mentoring characteristics were attained.
The dependent variables (Y) for administrative skills were skills in leadership;
policy and governance; communication and community relations; organizational
management; curriculum planning and development; instructional management;
evaluation and personnel management; staff development; educational research,
evaluation and planning; and skills in values and ethics of leadership. The dependent
variables for the mentoring activities were relationship emphasis, information emphasis
and facilitative focus.
Differences in perception of administrative skill competencies and mentoring
behaviors of OPI and RU interns and OPI and RU mentor administrators were examined.
46
This study tested a set of null hypotheses using a two-factor ANOVA method of
statistical analysis. Qualitative data was also gathered and then sorted according to the
pattern of the responses. The qualitative data is discussed as narrative information
gathered from this study.
Two-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was chosen for the statistical test. This
test (I) can look at two or more independent variables at a time, (2) “F” is a powerful
statistic, and (3.) can test for interaction.
Null Hypotheses
Interns - Administrative Skills
1.
The type of internship, OPI and RU, and the size of the school, AA/A and B/C, do
not significantly interact on the interns’ perceived competency on the 10 selected
administrative skills.
2.
There is no significant difference between OPI interns and RU interns in their
perceived competency on the 10 administrative skills,
3.
There is no significant difference between the perceived competency of interns
who served their internship in AAJA and interns who served their internship in B/C
schools on the 10 selected administrative skills.
4.
The type of the internship and the level of internship, Grades K-8, elementary.
Grades 7-12, high school and Grades K-12, do not interact on the competencies of the 10
selected administrative skills as perceived by OPI interns and RU interns.
47
5.
There is no significant difference between the perceived competencies on the 10
selected administrative skills and the school level. Grade K-8, elementary. Grade 9-12,
high school, and K-12 where the internship was served.
Interns - Mentoring Activities
6.
The type of internship, OPI or RU, and the size of the district, AA/A and B/C, do
not significantly interact on the interns’ perception of their mentor administrators’
mentoring activities in the areas of relationship emphasis, information emphasis, and
facilitative focus.
7.
There is no significant difference between the perceptions of OPI interns and RU
interns on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators.
8.
There is no significant difference between the perceived competency of interns
who served their internship in AA/A and interns who served their internships in B/C
schools on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators.
9.
The type of internship, OPI and RU, and the level of the internship, Grade K-8,
elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and K-12 do not significantly interact on the
mentor activities of their mentor administrators as perceived by OPI interns and RU
interns.
10.
There is no significant difference between the perceptions of interns, OPI and RU,
who served their internship at the school level, Grades K-8, elementary, Grade 9-12, high
school, or K-12, on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators.
48
Administrators - Administrative Skills
11.
The type of internship, OPI and RU, and the size of the district, AAA and B/C,
do not significantly interact on the competencies of selected administrative skills of OPI
interns and RU interns as perceived by their mentor administrators.
12.
There is no significant difference between the competencies on the I Oselected
administrative skills of OPI interns and RU interns as perceived by their mentor
administrators.
13.
There is no significant difference between the competency of interns who served
their internship in AA A schools and interns who served their internship in B/C schools
on the 10 selected administrative skills as perceived by their mentor administrators.
14.
The type of internship and the level of the internship do not significantly interact
on the competencies of the 10 selected administrative skills of OPI interns and RU interns
as perceived by their mentor administrators.
15.
There is no significant difference between the perceived competencies of OPI and
RU interns on the 10 selected administrative skills and the school level. Grade K-8,
elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and K-12 of the internship served as perceived by
intern mentor administrators.
Administrators - Mentoring Activities
16.
The type of internship, OPI and RU, and the size of the school, AAJA and B/C,
do not significantly interact on the mentor characteristics of their mentor administrators
f
49
as perceived by OPI and RU mentor administrators in the areas of relationship emphasis,
information emphasis, and facilitative focus.
17.
There is no significant difference between the perceptions of mentor
administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own mentor activities.
18.
There is no significant difference between the perceptions of the mentoring
administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own mentoring activities and the size of the
school (AA/A and B/C) where the internship was served.
19.
The type of the internship, OPI and RU, and the level of internship. Grade K-8,
elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and Grades K-12 do not significantly interact on the
mentor activities of OPI and RU mentor administrators as perceived by mentor
administrators.
20.
There is no significant difference between the perceptions of mentor
administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own mentor activities and the school level
Grades K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and Grades K-12, where the
internship was served.
Analytical Techniques
This study tested Hypotheses 1-20 to solve the problem of this study. The
perceptions of competency on nationally recognized administrative skills of interns by the
interns and mentor administrators and the degree of mentoring by mentor administrators
as seen by the interns and mentor administrators were analyzed. Two characteristics, size
50
of school and level of the internship, Grades K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school,
or K-12 were examined in relation to administrative skill development and mentoring
activities. The statistical method used was two-factor ANOVA.
I
Analysis of Data: Level of Significance
The general acceptable levels of significance are either 0.05 or 0.01 (Ferguson,
1976). The choice of either of the above alpha levels depends upon what the potential
consequences are of committing a Type I or Type II error. A Type I error occurs when a
true null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected. A Type II error occurs when one fails to
reject or retains a false null hypothesis. In this study the consequence of rejecting a true
null (Type I error) is that one may conclude that there is a greater degree of difference in
administrative skill and mentoring activities between the OPI and regular program than
actually exists. In so doing, there may possibly be changes in intern programs that are
not sound because one was thought to be much better than the other. However, if the null
is false and one fails to reject it (Type II error), then one fails to recognize that there are
significant differences in the perception of skill competencies and mentoring activities of
the OPI interns and regular interns and their mentor administrators. The researcher
considers a Type II error is of greater consequence in this study and should be avoided.
This study used the .05 level of significance. According to Kerlinger (1986), “The .05
level was originally chosen... .because it was considered a good gamble. It is neither too
high or too low for most social science research.” This will result in a greater chance of
having a Type I error, but a lesser chance of a Type II error.
51
Limitations and Delimitations
Each of the internships to some degree are specific to the program requirements,
the setting and the needs of the intern, so the fact that programs vary widely is a
limitation of this study. There is no way to standardize the activities, components or
length of the internships. There are a very small number of OPI interns to include in this
study even when using the whole population. A significant limitation was that this study
is based on information from 1-5 years old that may cause some problems associated with
the clear memory of events. The low reliability of several parts of the
A d m in is tr a tiv p .
Skills Instrument along with the small population is also a limitation in this research and
could have resulted in Type II errors that are not detected.
The study examined only the last five years and was specific to the state of
Montana. These are delimitations of this study. Also a delimiting factor was that the
study does not include educators who seek an administrative degree who have not had an
internship.
52
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS
Introduction
This research study examined the effectiveness of the OPI K-12 administrative
internship program and the regular university K-12-administrative internship program
using two research instruments. The Administrative Sldlls Instrument examined the
perceived competency on 10 selected administrative skills. The instrument was first
developed from a compilation of national administrator standards and tested for
reliability by university education professors. The second instrument was the “Principals
of Adult Mentoring” by Norman Cohen, which was used to examine the perceptions of
interns and administrators on the selected mentoring activities of relationship,
information and facilitation.
The problem of the study was to determine if there was a significant difference
between the two internship programs and the mentor activities that took place in both.
The size of the school, AA/A or B/C, and the level of the internship, elementary, high
school or K-12, was also examined in this study. The data reported in this chapter are
arranged into the following categories: I) Respondent Demographics, 2) Returns, 3) Test
of Hypotheses, 4) Descriptive Statistics, and 5) Summary.
53
Respondent Demographics
Each participant in this study was asked to respond to several demographic
questions to further describe the characteristics of the interns and administrators in the
four different groups. Of the twenty-five OPI interns who responded to the survey the
maj ority, twenty-one, were serving in the capacity of school administrator. There were
17 principals, 2 superintendents, and 2 K-12 administrators. Twenty of twenty-five RU
interns were serving as school administrators. There were 17 principals, 2
superintendents, and I K-12 administrator. The average years in education of the OPI
interns was 18 years which was slightly higher than regular (RU) interns at 16.3 years.
OPI mentor administrators had an average of 28.7 years experience in education
compared to regular (RU) administrators with 23.9 years. Three of the mentor
administrators were retired from their K-12 administrative positions since supervising
their intern.
Of the total respondents, interns and mentor administrators, 69% were male and
31% were female. The combined intern groups were 58% male and 42% female. In
contrast, the percentages of the mentor administrators were 86% male and 14% female.
Most of the respondents, 60%, received their Master’s degree in school administration
with 40% getting their Master’s degree in an education field other than school
administration. Overall OPI and RU interns said they planned to continue in
administration for approximately 13 years. However, the OPI and RU mentor
administrators said they would only stay an average of 7 more years in administrative
positions.
54
Returns
Two survey instruments were sent to the entire population of OPI interns and their
mentor or supervising OPI administrators. The first instrument, “Principles of Adult.
Mentoring Scale, B&G Version” was made up of three scales: Relationship Emphasis,
Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus. The second instrument, the
Administrative Skills Instrument, contained 10 skill areas. Ofthe 34 OPI interns, 33
were sent surveys. One intern who was seriously ill at the time of the study was not sent
a survey. All mentor OPI administrators were sent the survey. Seventy-six percent of the
OPI interns and 67.6% of the OPI administrators returned the instrument. From the
intern group twenty-two surveys, or 64%, were usable. The others were not usable due to
being totally blank. Of the OPI mentor administrators, there were six that had supervised
more than one OPI intern. Those individuals were asked to only respond in terms of their
latest intern.
In the regular intern group, 40 interns were sent surveys from which five letters
came back marked “No address.” Of the forty interns, twenty-four returned the survey
for a 60% or 68.6% return rate if the “no address” letters are subtracted from the total
sent. Of the 38 mentors of regular interns, three had supervised more than one intern
during the time of the study. Twenty-four of 38 mentor administrators returned the
survey. Of those, twenty-one surveys (55%) could actually be used in the data analysis
due to three surveys that were incomplete.
55
Hypotheses
The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS) Version 9.0. The hypotheses were tested using a two-factor analysis of variance
statistical procedure (ANOVA) to analyze the data. Kerlinger (1986) stated “Factorial
analysis of variance is the statistical method that analyzes the independent and interactive
effects of two or more independent variables on a dependent variable.” In this study the
researcher not only compared OPI and RU groups but also examined whether type, OPI
or RU, and school size, AAJA and B/C, interact and whether the type, OPI or RU, and
level of internship, Grades K-6, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and Grades K-12
interact independently on each of the dependent variables. Additional differences
between level of internship and size of the school where the internship was served were
examined.
Interns
Administrative Skills. Hypothesis I stated that the type of internship, OPI and
RU, and the size of the school, AA/A and B/C, do not significantly interact on the
interns’ perceived competency on the 10 selected administrative skills. This hypothesis
was retained. Results of the analysis presented in Table I shows that there is no
significant interaction of type of internship and size of school by interns in their
perception of their own competency on any of the 10 administrative skills.
Hypothesis 2 stated that there is no significant difference between OPI interns and RU
interns in their perceived competency on the 10 administrative skills. The analysis of
56
data to test Hypothesis 2 is also presented in Table 2. Based on the analysis.
Hypothesis 2 was retained. There is no significant difference between the perceived
competence of OPI and RU interns on any of the 10 administrative skills.
Hypothesis 3 stated that there is no significant difference between the perceived
competency of interns who served their internship in AAJA and interns who served their
internship in B/C schools on the 10 selected administrative skills. This hypothesis was
retained as shown by the data analysis presentation in Table 2.
Hypothesis 4 stated that the type of the internship and the level of internship.
Grades K-8, elementary. Grades 7-12, high school and Grades K-12, do not interact on
the competencies of the 10 selected administrative skills as perceived by OPI interns and
RU interns. Based on the analysis Hypothesis 4 is retained as presented in Table 4. No
significant interaction was found between type and level on any of the 10 administrative
skills.
Hypothesis 5 stated that there is no significant difference between the perceived
competencies on the 10 selected administrative skills and the school level, Grade K-8,
elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and K-12 where the internship was served.
Hypothesis 5 was retained. As determined from the data analysis presented in Table 4,
there was no significant difference among the perceived competency on the 10 selected
administrative skills and school level.
Mentoring Activities. Hypothesis 6 stated that the type of internship, OPI or RU,
and the size of the district, AAJA and B/C, do not significantly interact on the interns’
57
perception of their mentor administrators’ mentoring activities in the areas of
Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus. Data in Table 3
shows that there was no significant interaction of type of internship and size of school on
mentor administrators’ mentoring activities as perceived by OPI interns and RU interns.
Hypothesis 6 was retained.
Hypothesis 7 stated that there is no significant difference between the perceptions
of OPI interns and RU interns on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators.
Tables 3 and 5 indicate that there was no significant difference between OPI intern and
RU intern perceptions of the mentoring activities of their mentor administrators in the
areas of Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis and Facilitative Focus. Based on
the analysis. Hypothesis 7 was retained.
Hypothesis 8 stated that there is no significant difference between the perceived
competency of interns who served their internship in AAZA and interns who served their
internships in B/C schools on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators. The
analysis of the data, illustrated in Table 3, showed no significant differences. Hypothesis
8 was retained.
Hypothesis 9 stated that the type of internship, OPI and RU, and the level of the
internship. Grade K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and K-12 do not
significantly interact on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators as perceived
by OPI interns and RU interns. Table 5 shows that there was significant interaction
between type of internship and level of internship by interns’ responses to mentoring.
The area of Relationship Emphasis was significant at the .012 level and the Information
Emphasis area was significant at the .008 level. Therefore Hypothesis 9 was rejected
58
based on the interns’ responses. There was no significant interaction on the mentor
activity of Facilitative Focus.
Hypothesis 10 stated that there is no significant difference between the
perceptions of interns, OPI and RU, who served their internship at the school level,
\
Grades K-8, elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, or K-12 on the mentor activities of
their mentor administrators. The hypothesis was retained based on the data analysis
presentation in Table 5.
Administrators
Administrative Skills. Hypothesis 11 stated that the type of internship, OPI and
RU, and the size of the district, AAJA and B/C, do not significantly interact on the
competencies of selected administrative skills of OPI interns and RU interns as perceived
by their mentor administrators. Size and type were found to significantly interact on the
dependent variable of Education Research, Evaluation and Planning with a level of
significance of .048 as per the responses of the mentor administrators, OPI and RU.
Interaction was not found on the remaining dependent variables. These results are
illustrated in Table 6.
Hypothesis 12 stated that there is no significant difference between the
competencies on the 10 selected administrative skills of OPI interns and RU interns as
perceived by their mentor administrators. The analysis of data to test Hypothesis 12 is
presented in Table 6. Based on the analysis. Hypothesis 12 was retained. There were no
significant differences between the competencies on the 10 administrative skills of OPI
interns and RU interns as perceived by their mentor administrators.
59
Hypothesis 13 stated that there is no significant difference between the competency
of interns who served their internship in AA/A schools and interns who served their
internship in B/C schools on the 10 selected administrative skills as perceived by their
mentor administrators. This hypothesis was retained as shown by the data analysis
presentation in Table 6.
Hypothesis 14 stated that the type of internship and the level of the internship do
not significantly interact on the competencies of the 10 selected administrative skills of
OPI interns and RU interns as perceived by their mentor administrators. Based on the
analysis presented in Table 8, no significant interaction was found between type and level
on any of the dependent variables of the 10 administrative skills as perceived by the OPI
and RU intern mentor administrators. Hypothesis 13 was retained.
Hypothesis 15 stated that there is no significant difference between the perceived
competencies of OPI and RU interns on the 10 selected administrative skills and the
school level, Grade K-8, elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and K-12 of the internship
served as perceived by intern mentor administrators. Hypothesis 15 was retained. As
determined from the data analysis presented in Table 8, there was no significant
difference between the competency on the 10 selected administrative skills and school
level as perceived by the mentor administrators.
Mentoring Activities. Hypothesis 16 states that the type of internship, OPI and RU,
and the size of the school, AAJA and B/C, do not significantly interact on the mentor
characteristics of their mentor administrators as perceived by OPI and RU mentor
administrators in the areas of relationship emphasis, information emphasis, and
60
facilitative focus. Data in Table 7 show that there is no significant interaction of type
of internship and size of school on the mentor activities of their mentor administrators as
perceived by OPI and RU mentor administrators. Based on the analysis, Hypothesis 16
was retained.
Hypothesis 17 stated'that there is no significant difference between the
perceptions of mentor administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own mentor
activities. Based on the analysis presented in Table 7, there are no significant
differences. Hypothesis 17 was retained.
Hypothesis 18 stated that there is no significant difference between the
perceptions of the mentoring administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own
mentoring activities and the size of the school (AA/A and B/C) where the internship was
served. The data analysis is presented in Table 7. From this analysis Hypothesis 18 was
retained as there are no significant differences in the perceptions of mentor administrator
mentoring activities and the size of the school.
Hypothesis 19 stated that the type of the internship, OPI and RU, and the level of
internship, Grade K-8, elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and Grades K-12 do not
significantly interact on the mentor activities of OPI and RU mentor administrators as
perceived by mentor administrators. The analyzed data as shown in Table 9 indicates no
significant interaction on the mentor activities of OPI and RU mentor administrators as
perceived by mentor administrators on the type of internship and the level of internship.
Therefore, Hypothesis 19 was retained.
Hypothesis 20 stated that there is no significant difference between the
perceptions of mentor administrators of OPI and RU interns on their own mentor
61
activities and the school level Grades K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and
Grades K-12 where the internship was served. The analysis in Table 9 indicates no
significant differences. Based on this analysis. Hypothesis 20 was retained.
INTERN PERCEPTIONS OF OWN ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS
TABLE 2
Type by Size Analysis
#
DependentVariabIe
Source
Sum of
Squares
Mean Square
F
Siqnificance
1 Leadership
Type
Size
Type*Size
35.726
5.481
3.205
35.726
5.481
3.205
2.289
0.351
0.205
0.138
0.557
0.653
2 Policy
Type
Size
Type*Size
16.117
0.003179
0.341
16.117
0.003179
0.341
2.542
0.005
0.054
0.118
0.944
0.818
3 Community Relations
Type
Size
Type*Size
11.066
11.348
0.379
11.066
11:348
0.379
1.826
1.872
0.062
0.184
0.178
0.804
4 Organizational
Management
Type
Size
Type*Size
5.397
4.786
0.782
5.397
4.786
0.782
0.815
0.723
0.118
0.372
0.400
0.733
5 Curriculum Planning & '
Development
Type
Size
Type*Size
1.787
4.752
3.104
1.787
4.752
3.104
0.251
0.667
0.436
0.619
0.419
0.513
6 instructional Management Type
Size
Type4Size
0.566
0.446
7.430
0.566
0.446
7.430
0.050
0.040
0.661
0.824
0.843
0.421
7 Staff Evaluation &
Personnel Management
Type
Size
Type*Size
15.513
.003483
11.586
15.513
.003483
11.586
2.147
0.005
1.603
0.150
0.945
0.212
8 Staff Development
Type
Size
Type*Size
14.379
18.111
27.167
14.379
18.111
27.167
1.091
1.374
2.061
0.302
0.248
0.159
9 Educational Research,
Evaluation & Planning
Type
Size
Type*Size
2.858
2.419
8.456
2.858
2.419
8.456
0.419
0.354
1.239
0.521
0.555
0.272
Type
Size
Type*Size
19.146
1.960
0.472
19.146
1.960
0.472
2.732
0.280
0.067
0.106
0.600
0.797
10 Values & Ethics of
Leadership
62
Table 2 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of administrative intern
perceptions of their competency on the IOadministrative skills according to type of
internship, OPI and RU (regular); size of school, AAJA and B/C; and interaction of type
of internship and size of school. There were no significant differences nor interaction.
INTERN PERCEPTIONS OF
MENTORING ACTIVITIES
Table 3
Type by Size Analysis
Dependent Variable
Source
Sum of Sauares
Mean Square
F
Siqnificance
1 Relationship
Emphasis
Type
Size
Type*Size
76.886
70.387
60.635
76.886
70.387
60.635
0.775
0.709
0.611
0.384
0.404
0.439
2 Information
Emphasis
Type
Size
Type*Size
27.324
5.258
51.368
27.324
5.258
51.368
0.305
0.059
0.573
0.584
0.810
0.453
3 Facilitative
Focus
Type
Size
Type*Size
31.606
0.887
1.724
31.606
0.887
1.724
0.942
0.026
0.051
0.337
0.872
0.822
Table 3 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of the administrative interns’
perceptions of the mentoring activities of their mentor administrators in the three mentor
activities listed: Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus
and the type of internship, OPI and RU, the size of the school, AAJA and B/C, and
interaction of type and size. There were no significant differences nor interaction.
63
INTERN PERCEPTIONS OF OWN ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS
Table 4
Type by Level Analysis
# Dependent Variable
Source
Sum of
Squares.
Mean Square
F
Siqnificance
1 Leadership
Type
Level
Type*Level
8.835
14.016
16.939
8.835
7.008
8.470
0.565
0.448
0.541
0.457
0.642
0.586
2 Policy
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
6.862
3.964
2.539
6.862
1.982
1.270
1.065
0.308
0.197
0.308
0.737
0.822
3 Community Relations
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
2.206
2.619
13.467
2.206
1.310
6.733
0.359
0.213
1.095
0.553
0.809
0.345
4 Organizational
Management
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
.001687
5.364
9.138
.001687
2.682
4.569
0.003
0.403
0.686
0.960
0.671
0.509
5 Curriculum Planning &
Development
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
1.084
25.585
14.934
1.084
12.792
7.467
0.160
1.889
1.103
0.691
0.164
0.642
6 Instructional Management
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
0.293
10.504
3.833
0.293
5.252
1.916
0.025
0.455
0.166
0.874
0.638
0.848
7 Staff Evaluation &
Personnel Management
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
7.921
18.513
6.763
7.921
9.257
3.381
1.091
1.275
0.466
0.302
0.291
0.631
8 Staff Development
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
5.497
31.104
19.758
5.497
15.552
9.879
0.401
1.134
0.720
0.530
0.332
0.493
9 Educational Research,
Evaluation & Planning
Type
Level
TypeTevel
0.859
39.242
1.346
0.859
19.621
0.673
0.134
3.063
0.105
0.716
0.058
0.900
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
15.304
22.465
2.031
15.304
11.232
1.016
2.236
1.641
0.148
0.143
0.207
0.863
10 Values & Ethics of
Leadership
■
64
Table 4 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of administrative intern
perception of the 10 administrative skills according to type of internship, OPI and RU,
and level of internship. Grades K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and Grades K12 and the interaction of type and level of internship. There were no significant
differences nor interaction.
INTERN PERCEPTIONS OF MENTORING ACTIVITIES
Table 5
Type by Level Analysis
Dependent Variable
1 Relationship
Emphasis
Source
Type
Level
3 Facilitative
Focus
Mean Square
35.116
326.726
802.961
35.116
163.363
401.481
Type*Level
43,749
332.334
768.697
Type
Level
Type*Level
1.228
94.576
187.101
Type*Level
2 Information
Emphasis
Sum of Squares
Type
Level
• F
Siqnificance
0.430
2.000
0.516
0.140
4.016
0.012
43.749
166.167
384.349
0.618
2.347
0.437
0.100
5.428
0.008
1.228
47.288
93.595
0.042
1.616
3.100
0.839
0.211
0.051
Table 5 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of the administrative interns’
perception of the mentoring activities of their mentor administrators for type, OPI and
RU; Level, Grades K-8, elementary, Grades 9-12, high school, and K-12; and interaction
of type and level. There was interaction on two of the 3 mentor activities. The mentor
activity, Relationship Emphasis, was significant at .012. The mentor activity,
Information Emphasis, was significant at .008. There are no other significant differences
or interactions of type, level and type and level.
The graphs of the cell means for mentor activities: Figure !-Relationship
Emphasis and Figure 2: Information Emphasis, show similar patterns of type by level
65
interaction. Elementary OPI and RU interns appear to score similarly. Grade 9-12,
high school, OPI interns score higher than RU interns. Interactions are due primarily to
the K-12 interns. K-12 OPI interns scored lowest while K-12 RU interns scored highest.
Mentoring: Type by Level Interaction
50.00
0re)
40.00
UJ
E
30.00
.C
20.00
-C
CL
0C)
O
'%
e
o'
-EIern
-HS
-K-12
10.00
OPI
Regular
Interns
Figure 2: Interaction of Mentor Activity: Relationship Emphasis-Type by Level
Mentoring: Type by Level Interaction
40.00
a
35.00
S
30.00
E
25.00
c
20.00
I
E
-2
15.00
10.00
5.00
OPI
Regular
Interns
Figure 3: Interaction of Mentor Activity: Information Emphasis-Type by Level
66
MENTOR PERCEPTIONS OF INTERN
ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS
Table 6
Type by Size Analysis
Dependent Variable
Source
Sum of Mean Square
Squares
6.511
6.511
20.947
20.947
2.758
2.758
1 Leadership
Type
Size
Type*Size
2 Policy
Type
Size
Type*Size
1.99
4.637
1.99
3 Community Relations
Type
Size
Type*Size
4 Organizational
Management
F
Siqnificance
0.694
2.33
0.294
0.410
0.143
0.591
1.99
4.637
1.99
0.546
1.271
0.546
0.465
0.267
0.465
0.368
0.817
6.785
0.368
0.817
6.785
0.067
0.149
1.234
0.797
0.702
0.274
Type
Size
Type*Size
5.038
0.527
6.842
5,038
0.527
6.842
1.006
0.105
1.366
0.322
0.748
0.250
5 Curriculum Planning &
Development
Type
Size
Type*Size
.00729
0.322
1.476
.00729
0.322
1.476
0.000
0.06
0.273
0.991
0.809
0.604
6 Instructional
Management
Type
6.779
6.779
0.914
0.345
Size
Type*Size
.002286
13.504
.002286
13.504
0.003
1.821
0.956
0.185
7 Staff Evaluation &
Type
Personnel Management Size
Type*Size
5.209
11.259
0.13
5.209
11.259
0.13
0.841
1.818
0.021
0.365
0.1,86
0.886
8 Staff Development
Type
Size
Type*Size
11.162
0.44
9.794
11.162
0.44
9.794
1.271
0.050
1.116
0.267
0.824
0.298
9 Educational Research,
Evaluation & Planning
Type
Size
Type*Size
1.33
5.619
21.872
1.33
5.619
21.872
0.254
1.075
4.185
0.617
0.307
0.048
Type
Size
Type*Size
.002627
10.179
1.077
.002627
10.179
1.077
0.001
2.373
0.251
0.980
0.132
0.619
10 Values & Ethics of
Leadership
67
fable 6 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of mentor administrator
perceptions of their intern’s competency on the 10 administrative skills according to type
of internship, OPI and RU; size of school, AA/A and B/C; and interaction of type of
internship and size of school. Type and size was found to interact significantly on the
skill area of Education Research, Evaluation, and Planning.
Figure 4: Interaction of Intern Skills: Type by Size of School
In general, OPI interns developed higher competency on the administrative skill,
Educational Research, Evaluation and Planning in B/C schools than did RU interns as
determined by their mentors. However, RU interns scored higher in this administrative
competency in AA/A schools than did OPI interns.
68
MENTOR PERCEPTION OF OWN MENTORING ACTIVITIES
TABLE 7
Type by Size Analysis
#
Dependent Variable Source
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
F
Significance
1 Relationship
Type
Size
Type*Size
0.168
20.87
3.452
0.168
20.87
3.452
0.007
0.900
0.149
0.933
0.349
0.702
2 Information
Type
.Size
Type*Size
.002848
8.722
8.289
.002848
8.722
8.289
0.000
0.355
0.337
0.997
0.555
0.565
3 Facilitative
Type
Size
Type*Size
.009235
.009235
.003700
.009235
.009235
.003700
0.001
0.001
0.048
0.973
0.973
0.828
Table 7 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of the mentor administrator
perceptions of their own mentoring on the three mentor activities: Relationship Emphasis,
Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus and the type of internship, OPI and RU, the
size of the school, AAJA or B/C, and interaction of type and size. There were no
significant differences nor interaction.
69
MENTOR PERCEPTION OF INTERN
ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS
Table 8
Type by Level Analysis
#
Dependent Variable
Source
1 Leadership
Type
Level
Type*Level
Sum of
Squares
2.902
4.377
3.514
2 Policy
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
Mean Square
F
Siqnificance
2.902
2.188
1.757
0.282
0.212
0.171
0.599
0.810
0.844
0.625
4.333
3.31
0.625
2.167
1.655
0.168
0.584
0.446
0.684
0.563
0.644
3 Community Relations Type
Level
TypeTeveI
2.322
0.545
0.504
2.322
0.272
0.252
0.389
0.046
0.042
0.537
0.956
0.959
4 Organizational
Management
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
0.972
0.427
1.807
0.972
0.213
0.904
0.180
0.040
0.168
0.674
0.961
0.846
5 Curriculum Planning
&
Development
Type
2.162
2.162
0.403
0.529
Level
TypeTeveI
8.906
2.137
4.453
1.068
0.831
0.199
0.444
0.820
Type
11.992
11.992
1.527
0.225
Level
TypeTeveI
8.525
13.301
4.262
6.65
0.543
0.847
0.586
. 0.437
Type
Level
0.259
10.120
0.259
5.060
0.040
0.791
0.842
0.462
TypeTeveI
7.912
3.956
0.618
0.545
8 Staff Development
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
9.001
2.844
9.519
9.001
1.422
4.759
0.963
0.152
0.509
0.333
0.859
0.605
9 Educational
Research,
Evaluation &
Planning
Type
0.879
0.879
0.148
0.703
Level
5.478
2.739
0.461
0.635
TypeTeveI
3.174
. 1.587
0.267
0.767
Type
Level
TypeTeveI
11.336
7.082
15.692
11.336
3.541
7.846
2.599
0.812
1.799
0.116
0.452
0.180
6 Instructional
Management
7 Staff Evaluation &
Personnel
Management
10 Values & Ethics of
Leadership
70
Table 8 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of mentor administrator perceptions
of their intern’s competencies on the 10 administrative skills according to type of
internship (OPI and RU) and level of internship (Grades K-8, Elementary, Grades 9-12,
high school, and Grades K-12) and the interaction of type of internship and level of
internship.
ADMINISTRATOR PERCEPTION OF OWN
MENTORING ACTIVITIES
Table 9
Type by Level Analysis
#
Dependent Variable Source
Sum of
Squares
Mean Square
F
Siqnificance
1 Relationship
Type
Level
Type*Level
9.492
27.734
60.243
9.492
13.867
30.122
0.406
0.593
1.287
0.528
0.558
0.288
2 Information
Type
Level
Type*Level
8.605
16.366
28.045
8.605
8.183
14.023
0.337
0.320
0.549
0.728
Type
Level
Type*Level
13.794
• 26.993
39.915
13.794
13.496
19.957
1.952
3 Facilitative
1.995
2.886
0.565
0.582
0.167
0.157
0.069
Table 9 illustrates the two-factor ANOVA analysis of the administrative interns’
perception of the mentor activities of their mentor administrators for type of internship
(OPI and RU), level (Grade K-8, elementary, Grade 9-12, high school, and K-12) and
interaction of type and level. There were no significant differences nor interaction.
71
Descriptive Statistics
In addition to testing for significant differences between the OPI and RU intern
groups, this researcher also examined the level of competency that the two intern groups,
OPI and RU, felt they had attained as a result of their internships. How well did the two
groups feel that they were prepared in each of the ten skills areas on the administrative
skills test?
TABLE 10: MEAN SCORES OF OPI AND REGULAR UNIVERSITY INTERNS ON THE 10 ADMINISTRATIVE
SKILL AREAS
Regular
Leadership
Community
Relations
Organization
Management
Curriculum
Planning
Personnel
Management
Staff
Evaluation
Staff
Ed. Research
Development Eval/Planning
Values
Ethics &
Regular
The chart contains the mean score in each of the administrative skill instrument categories of the OPI and regular univeristy
interns. The Likert scale in the instrument was scaled 1-5 with the following values: I = Not at all competent, 2 = Somewhat
competent, 3 = Competent, 4 = Very competent, and 5 = Extremely Competent. Both intern groups’ mean response fell in the
competent range or above in all ten of the administrative skills. The skill of Ethics and Values was rated highest with the OPI
interns’ mean falling in the “Very Competent” range. The skill of Education Research, Evaluation and Planning was rated the
lowest.
73
In 9 of the 10 administrative skill areas the OPI interns perceived themselves
slightly higher than RU interns in competency as illustrated in Table 10. The overall
ranking of competent or higher by both groups indicate that, regardless of the type of
program or length of program (OPI can be up to 3 years), upon completion of the
internships both groups of interns perceived that they were competent in the 10 different
skill areas.
Comparison of Mentor and Intern Perceptions of Mentoring Effectiveness
Another area examined was the perceptions of both the mentors and the interns on
mentor effectiveness. To determine mentoring competency, Norman Cohen developed a
chart for the Principles of Adult Mentoring Scale by which levels of effectiveness in the
mentoring skills could be scored. The author developed the chart by extensive testing of
the instrument to determine the reliability of scale intercorrelations. The reliability
analysis provided coefficients for scale scores at an alpha of .9609. This research used
three of the scales. Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis, and Facilitation Focus
were scored and totaled to give an overall score. The following chart shows the results of
this tabulation.
Effectiveness of mentoring will vary with each scale. Some mentors are very
proficient in one area and not so proficient in another. One implication of a score of not
effective or less effective may actually mean that there was a possible negative impact on
the intern. Effective would be defined as a neutral relationship whereas very effective
and highly effective indicate a positive effect of the mentor activities (Cohen, 1995).
74
Mentor Figures
Regular University Intern Program. The following figures illustrate (I) the
perceptions of regular university interns’ perceptions of their mentors’ behavior in the
areas of relationship and information emphasis, and facilitative focus, and (2) the
perceptions of regular university mentor administrators’ perceptions of their own
mentoring behaviors with their interns.
Figure 5: RU Interns and Mentor Administrators.
OVERALL SCORE-MENTOR BEHAVIORS
35
30
25
SS 20
E 15
3
10
Z
5
□ Admin
I. . •. .
0
r
•I
not
effective
less
effective
effective
very
effective
highly
effective
36-82
85-91
94-98
101-107
110-130
H Intern
-
Perceptions of Mentor Behaviors
The chart above shows the overall score of perceptions of regular university interns and
mentor administrators. In general, the interns’ perceptions were that their mentors were
not as effective as the mentor administrator perceived that their own mentor behaviors
were.
75
F ig u re 6: R U In te rn s a n d M e n to r A d m in istra to rs
Relationship Emphasis
12
10
S3 8
E 6
2
□ Admin
d Intern
4
2
0
not
effective
less
effective
effective
very
effective
.10-34
35-37
38-40
41-43
highly
effective
44-50
Perceptions of Mentor Behavior
Figure 6 illustrates that the perception of RU interns of their administrators
behaviors on the relationship emphasis scale was that of the 22 interns, 9 interns felt
activities fell in the very effective to highly effective categories, while 10 interns felt that
the mentoring was not effective.
Figure 7: RU Interns and Mentor Administrators
Information Emphasis
□ Admin
H Intern
not effective less effective
.10-31
32-35
effective
very effective
highly
effective
36-37
38-41
42-50
Perception of Mentor Behaviors
76
In the category of information emphasis 14 interns rated their mentor’s behavior
as not effective or less effective, while 3 mentor administrators selected the less effective
category. Sixteen mentor administrators ranked themselves as very effective or highly
effective while six interns ranked them in these two categories. As with the two previous
activities, interns perceived their mentors to be less effective than the mentor
administrators perceived their own effectiveness.
Figure 8: RU Interns and Mentor Administrators
Facilitative Focus
12
10
a> 8
-O
E 6
3 4
Z
EjAdmin
7 :H 8f
2
H Intern
— f lg l
I
O
not effective less effective
.6-17
18-19
ZL
effective
very effective
highly
effective
20-21
22-23
24-30
Perceptions of Mentor Behaviors
In the category of facilitative focus, 11 interns compared to 2 mentor administrators
ranked themselves in the not effective and less effective categories. However, 8 interns
ranked their administrators very effective to highly effective, compared to the 16 mentor
administrators who ranked themselves in these two categories.
77
Mentor Figures
OPI Intern Program. Similarly overall the OPI Interns and Mentor
Administrators assessed their mentoring effectiveness..
Figure 9: OPI Intern and Mentor Administrator
OVERALL SCORE-MENTOR BEHAVIORS
□ Admin
0 Intern
not
effective
less
effective
effective
very
effective
highly
effective
36-82
85-91
94-98
101-107
110-130
Perception of Mentor Behaviors
The overall rating for mentor behaviors indicated that the 25 OPI interns ranked their
mentors as not effective or less effective, while 6 of the mentor administrators ranked
themselves in these two categories. However, 44 administrators ranked themselves as
very effective or highly effective, while 27 OPI interns ranked them in these two
categories. The overall scores came from combining the three skill areas of relationship
emphasis, information emphasis, and facilitative focus.
78
F ig u re 10: O P I In te rn s a n d M e n to r A d m in istra to rs
Relationship Emphasis
to
8
□ Admin
■ Intern
not
effective
less
effective
effective
.10-34
35-37
38-40
very
highly
effective ' effective
41-43
44-50
Perception of Mentor Behaviors
In Figure 10, Relationship Emphasis, there were 8 OPI interns who ranked their mentors
in the not effective and less effective categories with I mentor administrator ranking
themselves similarly. Ten OPI interns ranked their mentors in the very and highly
effective categories while 14 mentor administrators ranked themselves there.
Figure 11: OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Information Emphasis
10
8
□ Admin
■ Intern
not
effective
.10-31
less
effective
I
32-35
effective |
36-37
very
effective
highly
effective
38-41
42-50
Perception of Mentor Behaviors
79
In the area of information emphasis 11 Interns ranked their mentors in the two least
effective categories while 4 mentor administrators ranked themselves there. In the top
two categories of very and highly effective, the 7 interns ranked their administrators there
while 14 mentors ranked themselves in these two categories.
Figure 12: OPI Interns and Mentor Administrators
Facilitative Focus
□ Admin*
B Intern
not
effective
less
effective
.6-17
18-19
effective
20-21
very
effective
highly
effective
22-23
24-30
Perception of Mentor Behaviors
In the category of faciIitative focus, there was one intern who ranked their mentor in this
category while 7 interns ranked their mentors here. In the two most effective categories,
the 10 interns ranked their mentors there and 16 administrators ranked themselves in
these top two categories. One administrator did not respond in this category.
As illustrated in Figure 13 below, the mentor administrators rated themselves as
more effective than did their interns. The chart illustrates a compilation of the mentor
activities of Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis, and Facilitative Focus.
80
F ig u re 13: O P I a n d R e g u la r In te rn s a n d M e n to rs M e n to r O v e ra ll R a tin g
Mentor Overall Rating Graph
—♦ — Reg. Admin
—a — Reg. Interns
S- 15
Not Effective
Less
Effective
Effective
Very
Effective
A
OPI Admin
X
OPI Interns
Highly
Effective
Mentor Effectiveness Categories
Summary
There were very few significant differences between the OPI and RU intern
groups in their perceptions of their own competencies in the ten administrative skill areas
or the mentoring effectiveness of their mentor administrators. There were also few
significant findings between the OPI and RU mentor administrator groups in their
perceptions of their interns’ competencies and their own mentoring activities with their
interns.
Of the twenty null hypotheses tested, twelve main effects and eight interaction
hypotheses were retained. There were only three in which there were significant
differences. In the test of Hypothesis 11 a significant interaction of type and size on the
dependent variable administrative skill area, Education Research, Evaluation and
Planning, was found at a significant level of .048. Hypothesis 9 testing for the interaction
of type of internship, OPI or RU, and level of internship, Grades K-8, elementary. Grades
9-12, high school, and Grades K-12 on the mentor activities of mentor administrators as
81
perceived by the interns was rejected on two mentor activities. Relationship Emphasis
and Information Emphasis. There was no significant interaction on the third mentor
activity, Facilitative Focus. In the examination of the interactions involving the mentor
activities Relationship Emphasis and Information Emphasis, it was noted that OPI K-12
interns rated their mentors lower than both of the other levels, Grades K-8 and Grades 912. However, the regular interns rated their mentors’ activities in these areas higher than
did the OPI interns.
The test of the remaining 18 hypotheses did not indicate any significant
differences in the administrative skills or mentor activities nor any interaction of type and
size or type and level on the administrative skills or mentor activities. In conclusion,
there were only 3 instances (two hypotheses) where statistical significance was detected
between the two intern programs, the OPI and regular, on the 10 selected administrative
skills or selected mentor activities.
The examination of the mean of the ratings of the interns’ perceived competency
on the 10 selected administrative skills indicates that both intern groups, OPI and RU, felt
that they were competent or very competent. The OPI interns perceived themselves to be
slightly more competent than RU interns in all categories except for Curriculum
Planning. The highest rated category of both groups was Values and Ethics at 4.23 for
OPI and 3.83 for RU which gave an overall 4.03 average. The lowest rated category for
both intern groups was Education Research, Evaluation and Planning where 3.01 was the
mean for OPI interns and 2.93 for RU interns for an average of 2.97. Both were still in
82
the competency range. Both intern groups, OPI and RU, felt that their internship
effectively prepared them on the 10 administrative skills.
Research indicates that mentoring assists development of skills in an experiential
setting (Cohen, 1995). An analysis was conducted to compare the interns’ perception of
their mentor’s effectiveness to the mentors’ perception of their own effectiveness.
Overall in the three areas of Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis and
Facilitative Focus, the mentors felt they had performed more effectively on these skills
than the interns thought their mentors had done. This information is illustrated on page
78. Internships under the guidance of a school administrator serving as a mentor
provided clinical on-site experience along with academic training from the university.
Interns perceived that their training in the internship developed competency in the
10 selected administrative skills. The perceptions of the interns’ mentor administrators in
both the OPI and RU programs strongly supported intern competency in skill
development. Through the mentor activities of relationship, information and facilitation, .
mentors provide assistance to interns to help them develop competencies, provide
direction for their careers, and support them in the learning of administrator skills in the
clinical on-site internship. Helping to prepare competent administrative candidates has
the potential to reduce the shortage of administrators for Montana schools.
83
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
In A Nation At Risk, the report commissioned by the National Commission on
Excellence in Education in 1983, national authorities were very critical of the state of
America’s schools. One of the recommendations included implementation of programs
for professional development and support of principals and superintendents to carry out
leadership that is crucial to the development of school reform. In 1984, John Goodlad’s
A Place Called School was published. Goodlad called for schools to have a system of
identifying employees with leadership potential and that those identified educators should
be enrolled in a carefully planned program made up of academic study and internships
leading to professional competency as a school administrator.
The standards and requirements addressed in A Nation At Risk have taken many
years to evolve into the present day measures of accountability that the federal
government is requiring. A threat of loss of federal funds hanging over the schoolhouse
door encourages compliance. One by one states are falling in line to implement
mandated standards and a means of assessing the learning of today’s K-12 students.
Montana has now joined other states through the action of the Board of Public Education
in setting standards for schools, for curricular areas and for the assessment of those
standards with a statewide-mandated test, the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) at Grades
84
4, 8 and 11. Schools in Montana whose test scores are among some of the highest in the
nation will now provide opportunities for public scrutiny of the results of their students’
tests.
In order to develop curricula and assessments that will measure what is being
taught in each school, strong leadership is essential. The Montana State Office of Public
Instruction State Accreditation Standards (1999) for schools now require a school
improvement plan that includes input from the community, a school profile, and a
continuum of curriculum development and assessment according to a schedule of
implementation determined at the state level.
Today, with the increased emphasis on standards and student achievement,
Montana schools deserve high-quality leadership in administrative and educational
positions. However, the results of a national study sponsored by the National Association
of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) and the National Association of Secondary
School Principals (NASSP) verified that there is a serious shortage of administrators to
fill current and projected future vacancies (NAESP, 1996-2000). Loran Frazier,
executive director of the School Administrators of Montana, supported the national study
results in his statement that there have been shortages in the number of school
administrators needed in Montana schools the past several years and that there will be
another shortage of administrative candidates in Montana for the 2000-2001 school year
(2000, personal communication).
85
Summary of Findings
The new curricula requirements, accreditation standards, and accountability
required by the Montana Board of Public Education of each school district supports the
importance of continuing to research and expand quality administrator preparation
programs that encourage and prepare qualified individuals to become principals and
superintendents in'our state’s K-12 schools. The continuance of a supply of quality
school administrator candidates would appear to help address the administrator shortage
especially if the administrator’s development was the result of selection according to
leadership potential and support by the school district itself (Goodman and Zimmerman,
2000). The quality of school graduates is ultimately the responsibility of school
administrators as leaders, facilitators, planners and positive change agents. Our children
who will become our future leaders will develop best in schools where highly competent
teachers work with highly competent principals and superintendents (Sergiovanni, 2000).
The problem of this study was to determine if there were significant differences in
the OPI administrative intern program and the regular university administrative program
as perceived by the interns on 10 selected administrative skills. The study also
determined whether there were significant differences in the effectiveness of intern
mentoring by their supervising administrators in the two administrative preparation
programs.
Forty-two educators who had served either an OPI or regular university internship
participated in the study. Forty-one school administrators who had served as mentors
86
also participated in the study. Both groups responded to two surveys. One survey asked
for the interns’ perception of their competency in 10 skill areas at the completion of their
internship. Both intern groups’ mentor administrators also rated the same competencies
of their intern. The second survey asked interns to indicate the degree of effectiveness to
which they felt their administrator mentored them during their internship. Administrators
were asked their perception of their own mentoring activities. In this study of
internships, participants rated their preparation on administrative competencies as
competent and very competent which supports the emphasis that internships and
mentoring are very important to school leadership development (Jean and Evans, 1995;
Kerka, 1998).
The results of the study indicated that only three hypotheses were rejected. All
three were interaction hypotheses. One involved type of internship, OPI or RU, and size
of the school, AAJA or B/C on the one administrative skill, Education Research,
Evaluation and Planning. In this interaction the OPI interns had a higher perceived
competency on the above skill than the regular interns in AA/A schools. The regular
interns in B/C schools scored their perception of competency higher than OPI interns.
The two other significant findings were interactions involving the mentor
activities of Relationship Emphasis and Information Emphasis and level of school where
internship was served, Grades K-8 Elementary, Grades 9-12 High School, and Grades K12. The interactions are due primarily to the K-12 interns. K-12 OPI interns scored
lowest, while K-12 regular interns scored their administrators’ mentoring activities
highest. The findings of this study support the literature’s emphasis that both internships
87
and mentoring are an important and critical component o f school administrator programs
(Goodman and Zimmerman, 2000).
Conclusions
Traditionally the administrator preparation programs in Montana involve talcing
advanced classes at the university to comply with principal and superintendent
certification requirements as required by the Montana Office o f Public Instruction
Certification. The OPI intern program provides an alternative in that a certified educator
can attain administrative certification while working as a principal or superintendent.
The results o f this study indicate that the two groups o f OPI interns and regular university
interns as well as their mentor administrators did not perceive any significant differences
11
in their perceptions o f competency on the 10 selected administrative skills. These
findings lend support to the following conclusions.
In the study both the intern and intern’s mentor were asked to give their
;
j
perceptions o f administrative skill competency. There were no significant differences
between the mentor and interns in OPI and regular program. By checking the
competency levels attained, it was found that both interns and mentor administrators felt
that interns had scored most often at the competent and highly competent level on the 10
' 1I
selected administrative skills regardless o f which program, OPI or RU, in which the
intern had participated. The findings show that the OPI program works very well in
preparing administrative interns in administrative skills, as does the regular program.
From these results one can conclude that both intern groups, OPI and regular, are well-
, i;
1i
S
;'
88
prepared for an administrative position and that based upon these competency levels
school districts who are searching for a principal or superintendent can feel confident
about their level preparation for the position based on the 10 administrative skills tested.
The mentor instrument did show some interesting differences between the intern
perceptions o f mentoring by their supervising administrators and the supervising
administrators’ ranking o f their own mentoring activities. The mentors rated themselves
much more effective than their interns rated them. The OPI interns did not appear to rate
their administrators to any higher degree than did the RU interns even though the OPI
interns had completed I, 2 or 3 years o f an internship compared to the regular interns
whose internship was either half a year or a full year. One can conclude that the length o f
time is not a factor in determining the degree o f relationship, information or facilitation
that was gained from the expertise o f the mentor administrator and that there are other
factors that influence the level o f mentoring.
Previous studies, as described in Chapter 2, have found that mentoring plays a
very important role in skill development as well as providing intern support. The results
o f the mentoring instrument showed the interns did not score their mentors as highly as
the mentors scored themselves in the mentor areas o f relationship, information and
facilitation. As previously noted in this study, people learn by doing new things in
conjunction with others. It can be concluded that the mentor administrators may not
understand what is needed by their interns in the areas o f relationship, information and
facilitation and that their ways of working with and assisting their interns need to be
improved.
89
Recommendations
Actions
From the conclusions stated as a result o f the findings o f this study, a number o f
recommendations are made. These recommendations are based on the research as well as
on those situations that are particular to the state o f Montana where the research was
conducted.
School boards and administrators would be well served to look positively on the
administrative internship, OPI and RU, as a means o f preparing an administrator for their
school. The self-scoring and mentor administrator scoring o f intern competency indicates
that interns are competent or highly competent on the 10 administrative skill
competencies as tested in this research.
School board and administrators should feel confident about using the OPI intern
program to fill an administrative position in their school districts even though the OPI
intern serves as a school administrator while earning their administrative certification.
Administrators should be given some training in being a mentor if they are to
supervise an administrative intern. It appears from the data that while the mentors felt
that they were effective, a large number o f interns felt that their mentors were not
effective. It is suggested that guidelines for mentors and information on the activities of
an effective mentor would enable current administrators to provide skilled training and
support to an intern administrator.
90
State administrator organizations such as the Montana Association o f Elementary
School Principals should continue to develop “aspiring principals” programs to generate
interest in school administration and select those teachers whose leadership skills.can be
directed toward the principalship or superintendency.
School administrator organizations, school districts and universities should
continue to develop collaborative models o f administrator preparation, which the
literature indicates is productive and successful.
Research
Future research is important in the area o f administrator development. This study
found that many of the current administrators as well as those who were serving '
internships were planning to continue in administration from 6 to 8 years. Those serving
internships planned to stay in education from 12 to 14 years. Development o f excellent
programs takes time to put into place so that work should begin now in order to have
competent leaders for Montana school children in the future.
The above study was limited to the examination o f competency development by
two different internship programs, OPI and RU. Administrators who have served no
internship should be part o f a future study in order to obtain a more complete picture of
preparation program effectiveness.
The MSBA study (1999) found that one problem for school board members in
their search for an administrator was that they felt that many applicants were not
qualified. However, this study showed that both the interns and the mentor perceptions
91
were that the interns had developed a competent to highly competent level on the 10
administrative skills. Recommended research should include the school district’s (school
board members) perception o f skill development in the two intern programs. The
university system should then continue to examine and improve their internship programs
through the use of this research and study.
Gender differences on skill development and need for mentoring were not
examined in this study for any o f the four groups, OPI interns and administrators and
regular interns and administrators. In the statistics provided by the Montana Office o f
Public Instruction in the school year 1996-97, 89% o f school superintendents and 87% of
principals were male, and 11% o f superintendents were female and 13% o f the principals
were female (Nielson et ah, 1999). It is a recommendation for further study to test for
significant differences between male and female administrative interns on administrative
competency skill development and perceived mentoring activities.
The reliability of the Administrative Skills Instrument was quite low on several
skill categories. Research should continue in the development o f a better instrument with
greater reliability that will be a better measure o f administrator and intern administrative
skills. Since there were no differences and only three interactions on the dependent
variables in this study, other variables, administrative skills and standards areas should be
identified and examined.
92
Further research could also be done to investigate if the lack of significant
differences in mentoring activities found between the OPI and RU interns may be due to
lack o f effective mentoring as illustrated in Figures 4-12.
REFERENCES CITED
94
Abdal-Haqq, Ismat (1998). Constructivism in teacher education. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 425
986).
Chambers, K. (1999). Oral interview.
Cohen, N. H. (1995). Mentoring adult learners: a guide for educators and trainers.
Malabar FE: Krieger Publishing.
Daresh, J. C., Playko, M. A. (1992). The professional development o f school
administrators. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Dembowski, F. (1998). What should we do? Suggested directions for school
administration programs. The AASA Professor 2 2 (1 ) [On line]
www.aasa.org/TAP/summer9808.htm.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Drucker, P. (1995). The effective executive. New York: Harper and R ow .,
Educational Research Service and Gordon S. Black Corporation. (1998). Is there a
shortage o f qualified candidates for openings in the principalship? An exploratory
study
National Association o f Elementary School Principals. VA: Alexandria.
Ferguson, G. A. (1976). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. N ew York:
McGraw-Hill.
Fogarty, J. (1999). Architects o f the intellect Educational Leadership, 57(3), p. 76-79.
Frazier, L. (2000). Telephone Interview.
Freshour, D. (1999). Montana Office o f Public Instruction.
Fullan, M.G.(1992). Visions that blind, Educational Leadership, 49(5), p. 19-20.
Fullan, M.G. (1991). The new meaning o f educational change (2nd ed.). New York:
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Fullan, M.G. (1998). Leadership for the 21st century. Educational Leadership 55(7) p. 6-
11.
Galbraith M.W. & Cohen N. H.(1995). Mentoring: new strategies and challenges. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
95
Glickman C., Gordon S., Ross-Gordan5J. (1995). Supervision o f Instruction. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Goldberg, M. F. (2000). An interview with John Goodlad: leadership for change. Phi
Delta Kappan. 82 (I), p. 84-85.
Goodlad, J. 1.(1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Goodman, R. H. and Zimmerman, Jr., W. G. (2000). Thinking differently:
recommendations for 21st century school board/superintendent leadership, governance
and teamwork for high student achievement. Educational Research Service and New
England School Development Council.
Hall, G.E. & Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in schools. Albany: State University o f New
York Press.
Haller, E.J., Brent, B.O. & McNamara, J.H.(1997). Does graduate school training in
educational administration improve America’s schools? Phi Delta Kappan. 79 (3), p.
222-227.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H. (1977). Management o f organizational behavior. Englewood
Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Houston, P. (1999). Districts searching for superintendents. AASA Leadership News.
1(16), p. I & 5.
Hoy, W.K. & Miskel, C.G. (1991). Educational administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hoyle, J.R., English, F. W. & Steffy, B.E. (1998). Skills for successful 21st century
school leaders. Arlington, VA: American Association o f School Administrators.
Inkster, R.(1994) Internships and reflective practice: informing the workplace, informing
the academy (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED 376 459).
Jean, E.W. & Evans, R.D.(1995). Intemships/mentorships for first-year principals:
implications for administrative certification and graduate program design. Montana
State Board o f Education Helena, MT: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No
ED 390 805).
Kerka, S. (1998). New perspectives on mentoring. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. 194 (ED 418 249:98).
Kerlinger, F. (1986). Foundations o f behavioral research. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., p. 157.
96
Kraus, C.M. & Cordeiro, PA. (1995). Challenging tradition: re-examining the
preparation o f educational leaders for the workplace (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No ED 390 129).
Menges, R. J. and Weimer, M.(1996). Teaching on solid ground. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Milstein, M. M. (1993). Changing the way we prepare educational leaders. Newbury
Park CA: Corwin Press.
Montana Office o f Public Instruction (1999). Montana school accreditation standards
and procedures manual. Section 10.55.701-705.
Montana School Boards Association (1999). A study o f the shortage o f school
administrators in the state o f Montana. Report produced by Montana State University.
Montana Office o f Public Instruction (1999). Intern principal contract document.
Master’s Degree in Educational Administration (1999). Montana State University and
University o f Montana.
National Commission on Excellence. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for
educational reform. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Nielson, D., Lamson, J., Love, J., Quinlan, M. (1999). Montana statewide education
profile. Helena, MT: Montana Office o f Public Instruction.
Patterson, J. (1997). Coming clean about organizational change. Arlington, VA:
American Association o f School Administrators.
Reed, R.F., & Johnson, T.W. (1996). Philosophical documents in education. White Plains
NY: Longman.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1995) The principalship. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Spillane, R.R.& Regnier, P. (1998). The superintendent o f the future. Gaithersburg, MD:
Aspen Publications.
Schmuck, P. A., (1992). Educating the new generation o f superintendents. Educational
Leadership. 49(5), p. 66-70.
Stein, D. (1998). Situated learning in adult education (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service ED418250).
97
Schwahn C.J.& Spady W. G. (1998). Total leaders. Arlington VA: American
Association o f School Administrators.
Svinicki, M.D. Dixon, N.M. (unknown) The Kolb model modified for classroom
activities. College Teaching. 35(4), p. 141-146.
The Mentorship Institute (1999) [On-line] Available: http://www.mentoringresources.com/lex/lexmain.htm.
98
APPENDICES
99
APPENDIX A
AASA SKILLS FOR SUCCESSFUL 21 st CENTURY
SCHOOL LEADERS
I
From AASA Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. ( John
Hoyle, Fenwick English, and Betty E. Steffy, 1999)
The skills listed below come from the above text. They were ,drawn from AASA Guidelines for
the Preparation of School Administrators, 1993; AASA’s Professional Standards for the
Superintendency; NCATE’s Curriculum Guidelines; and from standards and skills published by
the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) and the National Association
of Secondary Principals (NASSP).
DIRECTIONS:
Choose the three most important skills from each o f categories below that you feel should
be learned as part o f an internship in school administration. Indicate your choice with an
“X” on the line in front o f the skill.
1. SKILLS IN LEADERSHIP
___ I . Create and effectively communicate a district or school vision statement
___ 2. Establish priorities in the context o f community culture and student and staff needs.
___ 3. Conduct district and school climate assessments
___ 4. Assess student achievement data.
___ 5. Develop a strategic plan for a district or school.
___ 6. Empower others to reach high levels o f performance.
___ 7. Align financial, human, and material resources with the vision, mission and goals
o f a district or school.
2. SKILLS IN POLICY AND GOVERNANCE
___ I .Understand the system o f public school governance in our democracy
___ 2. Describe procedures for effective superintendent/board and principal/site-based
team relationships.
___ 3. Formulate and shape policy to provide quality education for children and youth
___ 4. Demonstrate conflict-resolution and interpersonal sensitivity skills in working with
groups whose values and opinions may conflict.
___ 5. Establish collaborative, school-linked services with community and other education
resources
3. SKILLS IN COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS
___ I . Articulate district or school vision, mission and priorities to the community and
mass media.
___ 2. Write and speak effectively.
___ 3. Demonstrate group leadership skills.
___ 4. Involved in strategies for passing referenda.
___ 5. Persuade the community to adopt initiatives that benefit students.
___ 6. Engage in effective community relations and school-business partnerships.
___ 7. Build consensus.
___ 8. Create opportunities for staff to develop collaboration and consensus-building
skills
2
___ 9. Integrate youth and family services into the regular school program
___ 10. Promote ongoing dialogue with representatives o f diverse community groups.
4. SKILLS IN ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
___ I. Gather, analyze and use data for informed decision making
___ 2. Delegate decision-making responsibility.
___ 3. Ensure adherence to legal concepts, regulations and codes for school operations.
___ 4. Use technology to enhance administration.
___ 5.Engage in financial planning
___ d.Establish procedures for budgeting, accounting and auditing
___ 7. Administer auxiliary programs.
___ 8. Develop a plan to maintain the school plant, equipment and support systems.
___ 9. Apply appropriate components o f quality management
___ 10. Implement a systems approach to monitor all components o f the school system
(subsystems) for efficiency.
5. SKILLS IN CURRICULUM PLANNING AND DEVLEOPMENT
___ I . Develop curriculum design and delivery systems for diverse school communities
___ 2. Create developmentally appropriate curriculum and instructional practice.
___ 3. Assess students’ present and future learning needs.
___ 4. Demonstrate an understanding o f curricular alignment to ensure improved student
performance and higher-order thinking.
___ 5. Design, evaluate and refine curricular, co-curricular and extracurricular programs.
___ 6. Create curricula based on research, applied theory, informed practice
recommendations o f learned societies, and state and federal policies and mandates
___ 7. Use technology, telecommunications, and information systems to enrich curriculum
development and delivery.
6. SKILLS IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
___ I .Develop, implement, and monitor change processes to improve student learning,
adult development, and learning climates
___ 2. Understand the role o f motivation in the instructional process
___ 3. Promote effective classroom management.
___ 4. Encourage total student development
___ 5. Analyze and assign financial resources to enhance student learning
___ 6. Apply instructional strategies that reflect sensitivity to multicultural issues and
varied styles
___ 7. Monitor and evaluate student achievement based on objectives and expected
performance.
___ 8. Establish a student achievement monitoring and reporting system based on
disaggregated data.
7. SKILLS IN STAFF EVALUATION AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
3
___ I. Apply effective staff evaluation models and process for teacher and administrator
evaluation
___ 2. Develop a personnel recruitment, selection, development and promotion procedure
___ 3. Understand legal issues related to personnel administration
___ 4. Conduct a district school human resources audit
8. SKILLS IN STAFF DEVELOPMENT
___ I . Develop a plan to identify areas for concentrated staff development
___ 2. Evaluate the effectiveness o f comprehensive staff development programming
___ 3. Implement future-focused personnel management strategies
___ 4. Assess individual and institutional sources o f stress and develop methods for
reducing distress
___ 5. Demonstrate knowledge o f pupil personnel services and categorical programs (Sp.
Ed, Title I)
___ 6. Improve organizational health and morale.
7. Train staff in teamwork skills
9. SKILLS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION AND PLANNING
___ I. Use various research designs and methods.
___ 2. Select the proper data-gathering analysis and interpretation methods
___3. Use basic descriptive and inferential statistics
___ 4. Demonstrate the use o f qualitative research methods ( e.g. constructivist,
naturalistic techniques)
___ 5. Use research-based models and standards for evaluating educational programs.
___ 6. Engaged in strategic planning for district’s future.
10._SKILLS IN THE VALUES AND ETHICS OF LEADERSHIP
I . Demonstrate ethical and personal integrity
___ 2. Model accepted moral and ethical standards in all interactions.
___ 3. Promote democracy through public education
___ 4. Exhibit multicultural and ethnic understanding and sensitivity
___ 5. Implement a strategy to promote respect for diversity
100
APPENDIX B
RELIABILITY LETTER &
ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
Ramona Stout
PO Box 425
Manhattan, MT 59741
February 17, 2000
Dear
As a doctoral student at Montana State University-Bozeman, I am interested in
examining the internship component o f administrator preparation programs. To do this, I
need your help. My particular interest focuses on the administrative skills that are developed
and the mentoring activities that take place during the internship. As part o f the study I will
be comparing the regular internship with the OPI internship and as a result, hope to give
direction to the planning o f future administrator preparation programs.
Please complete and return the survey instrument by February 26th. Completing this
task should take no more than 10 minutes o f your time, but it will be critical to the success o f
the research.
You may be assured that your responses will remain completely confidential. The
return envelope has an identification number that will enable me to check your name off the
mailing list when the questionnaire is returned. The envelope will than be discarded. Your
name will never be associated with the results.
Please contact me if you have questions regarding the study. Your cooperation and
timely response are greatly appreciated.,
Sincerely,
Ramona Stout
I
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
Form I
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
S=Competent
4=Veiy Competent
S=Extremely
I. SKILLS IN LEADERSHIP
1. Create and effectively communicate a district or school vision statement
1 2 3 4 5
2. Establish priorities in the context of community culture and student and staff needs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Assess student achievement data
1 2 3 4 5
4. Empower others to reach high levels of performance
1 2 3 4 5
5. Align financial, human, and material resources with the vision, mission and goals of a district or
1 2 3 4 5
school
2. SKILLS IN POLICY AND GOVERNANCE
1. Describe procedures for effective superintendent/board and principal/site-based team relationships I 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate conflict-resolution and interpersonal sensitivity skills in working with groups whose
values and opinions may conflict
1 2 3 4 5
3. Establish collaborative, school-linked services with community and other education resources
1 2 3 4 5
3. SKILLS IN COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS
1. Articulate district or school vision, mission and priorities to the community and mass media
1
23 4 5
2. Demonstrate group leadership skills
1
23 4 5
3. Engage in effective community relations and school-business partnerships
1
23 4 5
4. SKILLS IN ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
1. Gather, analyze and use data for informed decision making
1 2 3 4 5
2. Apply appropriate components of quality management
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement a systems approach to monitor all components of the school system
1 2 3 4 5
(subsystems) for efficiency
5. SKILLS IN CURRICULUM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
1. Demonstrate an understanding of curricular alignment to ensure improved
student performance and higher-order thinking
1 2 3 4 5
2. Create curricula based on research, applied theory, informed practice,
recommendations of learned societies, and state and federal policies and mandates
1 2 3 4 5
3. Use technology, telecommunications, and information systems to enrich curriculum
development and delivery
1 2 3 4 5
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
3=Competent
4=Veiy Competent
S=Extremely
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
S=Competent
4=Veiy Competent
5=Extremely
(Circle one)
6. SKILLS IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
!.Develop, implement, and monitor change processes to improve student learning,
adult development, and learning climates
1 2 3 4 5
2. Encourage total student development
1 2 3 4 5
3. Apply instructional strategies that reflect sensitivity to multicultural issues and varied styles
1 2 3 4 5
4. Establish a student achievement monitoring and reporting system based on disaggregated data
1 2 3 4 5
7. SKILLS IN STAFF EVALUATION AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
1. Apply effective staff evaluation models and process for teacher and administrator evaluation
1 2 3 4 5
2. Develop a personnel recruitment, selection, development and promotion procedure
1 2 3 4 5
3. Understand legal issues related to personnel administration
1 2 3 4 5
8. SKILLS IN STAFF DEVELOPMENT
1. Develop a plan to identify areas for concentrated staff development
1 2 3 4 5
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive staff development programming
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement future-focused personnel management strategies
1 2 3 4 5
4. Improve organizational health and morale
1 2 3 4 5
9. SKILLS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION AND PLANNING
1. Select the proper data-gathering analysis and interpretation methods
1 2 3 4 5
2. Use research-based models and standards for evaluating educational programs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in strategic planning for district’s future
1 2 3 4 5
10. SKILLS IN THE VALUES AND ETHICS OF LEADERSHIP
1. Demonstrate ethical and personal integrity .
1 2 3 4 5
2. Model accepted moral and ethical standards in all interactions
1 2 3 4 5
3. Exhibit multicultural and ethnic understanding and sensitivity
1 2 3 4 5
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed envelope by April 26,2000.
From AASA Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. ( John Hoyle, Fenwick English, and Betty E. Steffy,
1999)
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
Form M
Following is a list of skills needed by school administrators. For each skill, indicate the competency your intern
achieved during his/her administrative internship. Use the scale:
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
S=Competent
4=Very Competent
S=Extremely
I. SKILLS IN LEADERSHIP
1. Create and effectively communicate a district or school vision statement
1 2 3 4 5
2. Establish priorities in the context of community culture and student and staff needs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Assess student achievement data
1 2 3 4 5
4. Empower others to reach high levels of performance
1 2 3 45
5. Align financial, human, and material resources with the vision, mission and goals of a district or
school
1 2 3 4 5
2. SKILLS IN POLICY AND GOVERNANCE
1. Describe procedures for effective superintendent/board and principal/site-based team relationships 1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate conflict-resolution and interpersonal sensitivity skills in working with groups whose
values and opinions may conflict
3. Establish collaborative, school-linked services with community and other education resources
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. SKILLS IN COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS
1. Articulate district or school vision, mission and priorities to the community and mass media
1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate group leadership skills
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in effective community relations and school-business partnerships
1 2 3 4 5
4. SKILLS IN ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
1. Gather, analyze and use data for informed decision making
1 2 3 4 5
2. Apply appropriate components of quality management
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement a systems approach to monitor all components of the school system
1 2 3 4 5
(subsystems) for efficiency
5. SKILLS IN CURRICULUM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
I. Demonstrate an understanding of curricular alignment to ensure improved
student performance and higher-order thinking
1 2 3 4 5
2. Create curricula based on research, applied theory, informed practice,
recommendations of learned societies, and state and federal policies and mandates
1 2 3 4 5
3. Use technology, telecommunications, and information systems to enrich curriculum
development and delivery
1 2 3 4 5
(Circle one)
6. SKILLS IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
I.Develop, implement, and monitor change processes to improve student learning,
adult development, and learning climates
1 2 3 4 5
2. Encourage total student development
1 2 3 4 5
3. Apply instructional strategies that reflect sensitivity to multiculturalissues and varied styles
1 2 3 4 5
4. Establish a student achievement monitoring and reportingsystem based ondisaggregated data
1 2 3 4 5
7. SKILLS IN STAFF EVALUATION AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
1. Apply effective staff evaluation models and process for teacher and administrator evaluation
1 2 3 4 5
2. Develop a personnel recruitment, selection, development and promotion procedure
1 2 3 4 5
3. Understand legal issues related to personnel administration
1 2 3 4 5
8. SKILLS IN STAFF DEVELOPMENT
1. Develop a plan to identify areas for concentrated staff development
1 2 3 4 5
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive staff development programming
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement future-focused personnel management strategies
1 2 3 4 5
4. Improve organizational health and morale
1 2 3 4 5
9. SKILLS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION AND PLANNING
1. Select the proper data-gathering analysis and interpretation methods
1 2 3 4 5
2. Use research-based models and standards for evaluating educational programs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in strategic planning for district’s future
1 2 3 4 5
10. SKILLS IN THE VALUES AND ETHICS OF LEADERSHIP
1. Demonstrate ethical and personal integrity
1 2 3 4 5
2. Model accepted moral and ethical standards in all interactions
1 2 3 4 5
3. Exhibit multicultural and ethnic understanding and sensitivity
1 2 3 4 5
From AASA Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. ( John Hoyle, Fenwick English, and Betty E. Steffy,
1999)
APPENDIX C
MENTOR SURVEY PERMISSION LETTER &
SURVEY LETTERS AND PRINCIPLES OF ADULT MENTORING SCALE
Dr. Worman H. Cohen
722 Arlington Road
Penn Valley. Pennsylvania 19072
(610) 664 2140
F e b r u a r y I, 2 0 0 0
M s. R a m o n a S to u t
PO Box 2 7 4
M a n h a tta n , MT 5 9 7 4 1
D ear R am ona:
I am p le a s e d to g r a n t y o u p e r m is sio n to u se th e P r in c ip le s o f
A d u lt M e n to r in g I n v e n t o r y 'm y o u r d is s e r ta tio n r e s e a r c h .
A s I in d ic a te d , th e o r ig in a l in s tr u m e n t w a s s u b j e c te d to
v a lid it y and r e lia b ilit y a n a ly s is for m y o w n d is s e r ta tio n , a n d it h a s
s u b s e q u e n t ly b e e n , u tiliz e d b y m a n y d o c to r a l s tu d e n ts in th e ir o w n
d o c to r a l w o r k .
If I c a n b e o f a n y a d d itio n a l a s s is ta n c e , p le a s e c o n ta c t m e.
b e lie v e y o u r s tu d y w ill b e a v a lu a b le c o n tr ib u tio n to th e f ie ld .
I
S in c e r e ly ,
Dr. N o r m a n H. C ohen
Ramona Stout
PO Box 425
Manhattan, MT 59741
PH: 406-284-6460
April 11,2000
Dear
I need your help! For my doctoral dissertation at MSU-Bozeman, I am examining
both the regular and OPI internships as part o f school administration training programs.
My study is intended to examine the administrative skills developed during the internship
and the mentoring activities that occur between the intern and his/her supervisor. The
results will help determine the role o f the internship in preparing school administrators
and provide direction in planning future programs.
Enclosed are two survey instruments. Both instruments are to be completed
according to your experience in your administrative internship. On the skills instrument,
respond according to the level o f competency you feel you achieved from your
administrative internship. On the mentoring instrument, please respond according to the
degree o f mentoring that took place with you by your supervising administrator during
your administrative internship. Your supervising administrator will also be completing
the same surveys.
Please complete and return both survey instruments by April 26, 2000.
Completing this task should take no more than 20 minutes o f your time, but it will be
critical to the success o f the research. A postage paid envelope is enclosed for your use.
You may be assured that your responses will remain completely confidential. The
return envelope has an identification number that will enable me to check your name off
the mailing list when the questionnaire is returned. The envelope will than be discarded.
Your name will never be placed on the questionnaire. I will, however, be doing several
telephone interviews as follow-up. Please check the blank in the introductory questions
section if you would be willing to do a phone interview.
Please contact me if you have questions regarding the study, or if you would like
a copy o f the results.
Your cooperation and timely response are greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Ramona Stout
Administrative Internship Study Introductory Questions
Please respond to the following items.
1. Counting the current year, I have___________years in education.
2. Counting the current year, how many years have you been: ____principal, ____ superintendent____ other
administrative position (specify)____________________________.
3. What position do you currently hold?___________________.
4. If you are presently in school
administration, how long do you plan to continue in an administrative position?_______
4. Are you? Male_____Female_____ 6. Was your Masters Degree in school administration?______
7. Would you be willing to participate in a follow up telephone interview? ___yes ___ no
If yes, please print your name and telephone number?________________________________________
Principles of Adult Mentoring Scale-I.
-Norman H. Cohen Copyright © 1999
Following is a list of 26 statements that represent mentor behavior. For each statement circle the frequency your
supervising administrator engaged in the behavior as a mentor to you during your internship. Use the scale below:
1= Never 2 - Infrequently 3 = Sometimes 4 = Frequently 5 = Always
1. I encourage interns to express their h o n e st fe e lin g s (positive and negative) about their
work-related experiences including such dimensions as training, educational opportunities; and
social relationships.
1 2 3 4 5
2. I ask interns for d e ta ile d
1 2 3 4 5
in form ation
about their progress in learning all aspects of their job.
3. I re fe r interns to other staff members and departments to obtain information relevant
to pursuing their individual goals for *education, *training, and *career development.
1
2 3 4 5
4. I attempt to be v e r b a lly su p p o rtiv e when interns are emotionally upset.
1
2 3 4 5
5.
1
2 3 4 5
1
2 3 4 5
7. I ask interns to identify c a r e e r ch o ic es as well as to explain their own stra te g ie s for continuing
their work-related training and learning to support the achievement of these career goals.
1
2 3 4 5
8. I encourage employees interns to provide a good deal of b a ck g ro u n d information about the
pursuit of their career goals, such as ^preparation, *success and ^problems.
1
2 3 4 5
9. I inquire in some depth about intern's strategies for utilizing w o rk p la c e re so u rc e s to increase
their on-the-job learning, and when appropriate *offer practical suggestions and *refer them
for assistance to improve their job performance.
1
2 3 4 5
10. I explain to interns that I really want to know what they as individuals h o n estly think, so that
I can offer advice specific to them about issues such as balancing job requirements/career
development commitments with responsibilities outside of the workplace.
1
2 3 4 5
I suggest to interns that we establish a re g u la r schedule of meeting times.
6. I make a good deal of e y e
c o n ta c t with employees intems*during our meetings.
I
I=Never 2 = Infrequently 3 = Sometimes 4 = Frequently 5 = Always
11. I arrange my meetings with interns at times when I will probably n o t b e
telephone calls or anticipated personal contacts by others.
12 .
in te rru p te d
(Circle one)
by
I encourage interns to consider formal educational opportunities to develop their career interests
as well as n o n tra d itio n a l a n d d ista n c e ed u ca tio n courses, such as those offered through
television, Correspondence, and *Intemet.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2
3 4 5
13. I offer recommendations to interns about their cu rre n t a n d fu tu r e tra in in g a n d ed u c a tio n a l
needs (from basic to advanced skills and learning based on specific information provided by
them regarding their own history of previous *training, *experience, and *academic/technical
preparation.
1 2 3 45
14. I attempt to guide interns who are currently exploring their own commitment to career or
work-related educational interests by posing a lte rn a tiv e v iew s, such as considering other
Career, *training and educational options.
1 2 3 45
15.1 verbally communicate my concerns to interns when their n e g a tiv e a ttitu d e s a n d em o tio n s
are expressed to me through such nonverbal behaviors as eye contact, facial expression,
and voice tone.
1 2 3 4 5
16. I discuss intern’s general reasons for planning to obtain additional work-related educational
cre d e n tia ls o r tra in in g and then focus on helping them identify concrete *degrees. Curricula,
Courses and *workshops.
1 2 3 4 5
17. I provide a reasonable amount offa c tu a l g u id a n c e in our discussions so that interns will
explore Cealistic options and Cttainable career objectives.
1 2 3 4 5
18. I encourage interns to use me as a sounding board to explore their Copes, Cdeas, *feelings,
and *plans.
1 2 3 4 5
19. I explore with interns who express a la c k o f co n fid en ce in themselves the ways in which
their own life experiences might be a valuable resource to help them *devise strategies to
succeed within the workplace environment.
1 2 3 4 5
20. I assist interns in using facts to carefully map out rea listic,
to achieve their Career, *training, and educational goals.
1 2 3 4 5
ste p -b y -ste p stra te g ie s
21. I listen to criticism from interns about work-related policies, regulations, requirements,
and even colleagues without immediately attempting to offer justifications.
1 2 3 4 5
22. I inform interns that in our meetings they can discuss
anxiety, self-doubt, fear, and anger.
1 2 3 4 5
“n e g a tiv e ” em otion s
such as
23. I discuss the p o s itiv e a n d n e g a tiv e fe e lin g s interns have about their own abilities
to succeed in their careers.
2 3 4 5
24. I ask probing questions that require more than a “y e s ” o r “n o ” a n sw e r so that
interns will explain (in some detail) their views regarding their career *plans and *progress.
1 2 3 4 5
25. I discuss my ro le a s a m e n to r w ith
are Cppropriate and Cealistic.
1 2 3 4 5
th e
interns so that their individual expectations of me
26. I try to cla rify th e p r o b le m s interns are explaining to me by verbally expressing my
understanding of their feelings and *then asking if my views are accurate.
1 2 3 4 5
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed envelope by April 26.2000.
Cohen, Norman H. (1999) E ffective m en torin g, HRD Press: Amherst, MA Permission granted: 2-1-2000
2
Ramona Stout
PO Box 425
Manhattan, MT 59741
Ph: 406-284-6460
April 12, 2000
Dear:
I need your help! For my doctoral dissertation at MSU-Bozeman, I am examining
both the regular and OPI internships as part o f school administration training programs.
My study is intended to examine the administrative skills developed during the internship
and the mentoring activities that occur between the intern and his/her supervisor. The
results will help determine the role o f the internship in preparing school administrators
and provide direction in planning future programs.
Enclosed are two survey instruments. Both instruments are to be completed
according to your experience with your most recent administrative intern excluding this
current school year, 1999-2000. On the skills instrument, respond according to the level
o f competency you feel that your administrative intern achieved. On the mentoring
instrument, please respond according to the degree o f mentoring that you did with your
intern during his/her administrative internship. Your administrative intern will also be
completing the same surveys.
Please complete and return both survey instruments by April 26, 2000.
Completing this task should take no more than 20 minutes o f your time, but it will be
critical to the success o f the research. A postage paid envelope is enclosed for your use.
You may be assured that your responses will remain completely confidential. The
return envelope has an identification number that will enable me to check your name off
the mailing list when the questionnaire is returned. The envelope will than be discarded.
Your name will never be placed on the questionnaire. I will, however, be doing several
telephone interviews as follow-up. Please check the blank on the introductory questions
section if you would be willing to do a phone interview.
Please contact me if you have questions regarding the study, or if you would like
a copy o f the results.
Your cooperation and timely response are greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Ramona Stout
Administrative Internship Study Introductory Questions
Please respond to the following items.
1. Counting the current year, I have___________years in education.
2. Counting the current year, how many years have you been: ____principal,____ superintendent _
administrative position (specify)____________________________.
3. What position do you currently hold?______________.■
other
4. If you are presently in school
administration, how long do you plan to continue in an administrative position?_____
5. Are you? Male_____Female_____ 6. Was your Masters Degree in school administration?_____
7. Would you be willing to participate in a follow up telephone interview? ___yes ___ no
If yes, please print your name and telephone number?___________________________________
Principles of Adult Mentoring Scale-M
-Norman H. Cohen Copyright © 1999
Following is a list of 26 statements that represent mentor behavior. For each statement circle the frequency you
engaged in the behavior as a mentor to your administrative intern. Use the scale below:
I=Never 2 = Infrequently 3 = Sometimes 4 = Frequently 5 = Always
1. I encourage interns to express their h o n e st fe e lin g s (positive and negative) about their
12
work-related experiences including such dimensions as training, educational opportunities, and
social relationships.
3
4 5
2. I ask interns for d e ta ile d in fo rm a tio n about their progress in learning all aspects of their job.
12
3
4 5
3. I re fe r interns to other staff members and departments to obtain information relevant
to pursuing their individual goals for *education, *training, and *career development.
12
3 4 5
4. I attempt to be v e r b a lly su p p o rtiv e when interns are emotionally upset.
12
3 4 5
5. I suggest to interns that we establish a re g u la r schedule of meeting times.
12
3 4 5
6. I make a good deal of e y e
I 2
3 4 5
7. I ask interns to identify c a r e e r ch o ic es as well as to explain their own stra te g ie s for continuing
their work-related training and learning to support the achievement of these career goals.
12
3 4 5
8. I encourage employees interns to provide a good deal of b a c k g ro u n d information about the
pursuit of their career goals, such as ^preparation, *success and *problems.
12
3 4 5
9. I inquire in some depth about intern’s strategies for utilizing w o rk p la c e re so u rc e s to increase
their on-the-job learning, and when appropriate *offer practical suggestions and *refer them
for assistance to improve their job performance.
12
3 4 5
10. I explain to interns that I really want to know what they as individuals h o n e stly think, so that
I can offer advice specific to them about issues such as balancing job requirements/career
development commitments with responsibilities outside of the workplace.
1 2 3
c o n ta c t
with employees interns*during our meetings.
4 5
I
1= Never 2 = Infrequently 3 = Sometimes 4 = Frequently 5 = Always
11. I arrange my meetings with interns at times when I will probably n o t b e
telephone calls or anticipated personal contacts by others.
in te r r u p te d h y
(Circle one)
1 2 3 4 5
12. I encourage interns to consider formal educational opportunities to develop their career interests
as well as n o n tra d itio n a l a n d d ista n c e ed u ca tio n courses, such as those offered through
♦television, *correspondence, and *Intemet.
1 2 3 4 5
13. I offer recommendations to interns about their cu rren t a n d fu tu r e tra in in g a n d e d u c a tio n a l
needs (from basic to advanced skills and learning based on specific information provided by
them regarding their own history of previous *training, *experience, and *academic/technical
preparation.
1 2 3 4 5
14. I attempt to guide interns who are currently exploring their own commitment to career or
work-related educational interests by posing a lte rn a tiv e v ie w s, such as considering other
♦career, ♦training and *educational options.
1 2 3 4 5
15. I verbally communicate my concerns to interns when their n e g a tiv e a ttitu d e s a n d em o tio n s
are expressed to me through such nonverbal behaviors as eye contact, facial expression,
and Voice tone.
1 2 3 4 5
16. I discuss intern’s general reasons for planning to obtain additional work-related educational
c r e d e n tia ls o r tra in in g and then focus on helping them identify concrete ♦degrees, ♦curricula,
♦courses and ♦workshops.
1 2 3 4 5
17. I provide a reasonable amount off a c tu a l g u id a n c e in our discussions so that interns will
explore ♦realistic options and ♦attainable career objectives.
1 2 3 4 5
18. I encourage interns to use me as a sounding board to explore their *hopes, *ideas, ♦feelings,
and *plans.
1 2 3 4 5
19. I explore with interns who express a la c k o f co n fid en ce in themselves the ways in which
their own life experiences might be a valuable resource to help them *devise strategies to
succeed within the workplace environment.
1 2 3 4 5
20. I assist interns in using facts to carefully map out realistic,, s te p -b y -ste p
to achieve their *career, *training, and *educational goals.
1 2 3 4 5
stra te g ie s
21. I listen to critic ism from interns about work-related policies, regulations, requirements,
and even colleagues without immediately attempting to offer justifications.
1 2 3 4 5
22. I inform interns that in our meetings they can discuss
anxiety, self-doubt, fear, and anger.
1 2 3 4 5
“n e g a tiv e ” em o tio n s
such as
23. I discuss the p o s itiv e a n d n e g a tiv e f e e lin g s interns have about their own abilities
to succeed in their careers.
1 2 3 4 5
24. I ask probing questions that require more than a "yes ” o r “n o ” a n sw e r so that „
interns will explain (in some detail) their views regarding their career ♦plans and ♦progress.
1 2 3 4 5
25. I discuss my r o le a s a m e n to r w ith
are ♦appropriate and ♦realistic.
1 2 3 4 5
th e
interns so that their individual expectations of me
26. I try to cla rify th e p r o b le m s interns are explaining to me by verbally expressing my
understanding of their feelings and ♦then asking if my views are accurate.
1 2 3 4 5
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed envelope by April 26.2000.
Cohen, Norman H. (1999) E ffec tive m en torin g, HRD Press: Amherst, MA Permission granted: 2-1-2000
2
102
APPENDIX D
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
I
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
FormI
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
3=Competent
4=Veiy Competent
5=ExtremeIy
I. SKILLS IN LEADERSHIP
1. Create and effectively communicate a district or school vision statement
1 2 3 4 5
2. Establish priorities in the context of community culture and student and staff needs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Assess student achievement data
1 2 3 4 5
4. Empower others to reach high levels of performance
1 2 3 4 5
5. Align financial, human, and material resources with the vision, mission and goals of a district or
school
1 2 3 4 5
2. SKILLS IN POLICY AND GOVERNANCE
1. Describe procedures for effective superintendent/board and principal/site-based team relationships 1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate conflict-resolution and interpersonal sensitivity skills in working with groups whose
values and opinions may conflict
1 2 3 4 5
3. Establish collaborative, school-linked services with community and other education resources
1 2 3 4 5
3. SKILLS IN COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS
1. Articulate district or school vision, mission and priorities to the community and mass media
1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate group leadership skills
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in effective community relations and school-business partnerships
1 2 3 4 5
4. SKILLS IN ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
1. Gather, analyze and use data for informed decision making
1 2 3 4 5
2. Apply appropriate components of quality management
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement a systems approach to monitor all components of the school system
1 2 3 4 5
(subsystems) for efficiency
5. SKILLS IN CURRICULUM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
1. Demonstrate an understanding of curricular alignment to ensure improved
student performance and higher-order thinking
1 2 3 4 5
2. Create curricula based on research, applied theory, informed practice,
recommendations of learned societies, and state and federal policies and mandates
1 2 3 4 5
3. Use technology, telecommunications, and information systems to enrich curriculum
development and delivery
1 2 3 4 5
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
3=Competent
4=Very Competent
S=Extremely
(Circle one)
6. SKILLS IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
!.Develop, implement, and monitor change processes to improve student learning,
adult development, and learning climates
1 2 3 4 5
2. Encourage total student development
1 2 3 4 5
3. Apply instructional strategies that reflect sensitivity to multicultural issues and varied styles
1 2 3 4 5
4. Establish a student achievement monitoring and reporting system based on disaggregated data
1 2 3 4 5
7. SKILLS IN STAFF EVALUATION AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
1. Apply effective staff evaluation models and process for teacher and administrator evaluation
1 2 3 4 5
2. Develop a personnel recruitment, selection, development and promotion procedure
1 2 3 4 5
3. Understand legal issues related to personnel administration
1 2 3 4 5
8. SKILLS IN STAFF DEVELOPMENT
1. Develop a plan to identify areas for concentrated staff development
1 2 3 4 5
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive staff development programming
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement future-focused personnel management strategies
1 2 3 4 5
4. Improve organizational health and morale
1 2 3 4 5
9. SKILLS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION AND PLANNING
1. Select the proper data-gathering analysis and interpretation methods
1 2 3 4 5
2. Use research-based models and standards for evaluating educational programs
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in strategic planning for district’s future
1 2 3 4 5
10. SKILLS IN THE VALUES AND ETHICS OF LEADERSHIP
1. Demonstrate ethical and personal integrity
1 2 3 4 5
2. Model accepted moral and ethical standards in all interactions
1 2 3 4 5
3. Exhibit multicultural and ethnic understanding and sensitivity
1 2 3 4 5
From AASA Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. ( John Hoyle, Fenwick English, and Betty E. Steffy,
1999)
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS SURVEY
Form M
Following is a list of skills needed by school administrators. For each skill, indicate the competency your intern
achieved during his/her administrative internship. Use the scale:
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
S=Competent
4=Very Competent
S=Extremely
I. SKILLS IN LEADERSHIP
1. Create and effectively communicate a district or school vision statement
12 3 4 5
2. Establish priorities in the context of community culture and student and staff needs
12 3 4 5
3. Assess student achievement data
12 3 4 5
4. Empower others to reach high levels of performance
12 3 4 5
5. Align financial, human, and material resources with the vision, mission and goals of a district or
school
12 3 4 5
2. SKILLS IN POLICY AND GOVERNANCE
1. Describe procedures for effective superintendent/board and principal/site-based team relationships 1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate conflict-resolution and interpersonal sensitivity skills in working with groups whose
values and opinions may conflict
3. Establish collaborative, school-linked services with community and other education resources
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. SKILLS IN COMMUNICATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS
1. Articulate district or school vision, mission and priorities to the community and mass media
1 2 3 4 5
2. Demonstrate group leadership skills
1 2 3 4 5
3. Engage in effective community relations and school-business partnerships
1 2 3 4 5
4. SKILLS IN ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
1. Gather, analyze and use data for informed decision making
1 2 3 4 5
2. Apply appropriate components of quality management
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement a systems approach to monitor all components of the school system
1 2 3 4 5
(subsystems) for efficiency
5. SKILLS IN CURRICULUM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
1. Demonstrate an understanding of curricular alignment to ensure improved
student performance and higher-order thinking
12 3 4 5
2. Create curricula based on research, applied theory, informed practice,
recommendations of learned societies, and state and federal policies and mandates
12 3 4 5
3. Use technology, telecommunications, and information systems to enrich curriculum
development and delivery
12 3 4 5
1= Not At All Competent 2=Somewhat Competent
Competent
S=Competent
4=Very Competent
S=Extremely
(Circle one)
6. SKILLS IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
!.Develop, implement, and monitor change processes to improve student learning,
adult development, and learning climates
1 2 3 4 5
2. Encourage total student development
1 2 3 4 5
3. Apply instructional strategies that reflect sensitivity to multicultural issues and varied styles'
1 2 3 4 5
4. Establish a student achievement monitoring and reporting system based on disaggregated data
1 2 3 4 5
7. SKILLS IN STAFF EVALUATION AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
1. Apply effective staff evaluation models and process for teacher and administrator evaluation
1 2 3 4 5
2. Develop a personnel recruitment, selection, development and promotion procedure
1 2 3 4 5
3. Understand legal issues related to personnel administration
1 2 3 4 5
8. SKILLS IN STAFF DEVELOPMENT
1. Develop a plan to identify areas for concentrated staff development
1 2 3 4 5
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive staff development programming
1 2 3 4 5
3. Implement future-focused personnel management strategies
1 2 3 4 5
4. Improve organizational health and morale
1 2 3 4 5
9. SKILLS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION AND PLANNING
1. Select the proper data-gathering analysis and interpretation methods
1
23 4 5
2. Use research-based models and standards for evaluating educational programs
1
23 4 5
3. Engage in strategic planning for district’s future
1
23 4 5
1. Demonstrate ethical and personal integrity
1
23 4 5
2. Model accepted moral and ethical standards in all interactions
1
23 4 5
3. Exhibit multicultural and ethnic understanding and sensitivity
1
23 4 5
10. SKILLS IN THE VALUES AND ETHICS OF LEADERSHIP
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed envelope by April 26.2000.
From AASA Skills for Successful 21st Century School Leaders. ( John Hoyle, Fenwick English, and Betty E. Steffy,
1999)
MONTANA STATE
- BOZEMAN